Bolton Wanderers Fans Forum

You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers Banter » Takeovers - why not us?

Takeovers - why not us?

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

1 Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 13:04

Norpig

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
Just read that Barnsley are in talks with a Chinese consortium to take them over and inject a lot of cash, why does this not happen to us?

We have a great stadium with a hotel attached and a great training base yet we never seem to be looked at properly by potential investors.

I know we have some debt but nowhere near the levels when Davies was the owner so what is the stumbling block with us?

2 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 13:11

MartinBWFC

avatar
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
I think that once the Holdsworth shit has been cleared up, we will be a viable asset to buy into.

3 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 13:31

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Our geographical location doesn't help having so many other footie clubs in close proximity, thereby limiting the catchment area from a business perspective.

At the other extreme, Norwich for example have no competition in one of the largest counties in the country so are very investable.

4 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 13:35

Norpig

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
I'm hoping so Martin but lets hope we don't get hit with some kind of points reduction from the EFL that would make it impossible to stay up this season and put off investors, it's going to be hard enough as it is!

5 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 14:16

terenceanne

avatar
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
Investment was always blocked by King Eddie & Darkside.  Eddie never wanted to give up control. Remember with the last two years of fun and games Eddie said he wants to make sure the correct people buy the club....thereby selling it to investors who don't have a pot to piss in.
I think Kenny is more open to it and will unload the whole shebang when the time is right....that being when he can make as much as possible out of it.
To think Barnsley are a better investment than us......doesn't make sense.

6 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 14:23

MartinBWFC

avatar
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
wanderlust wrote:Our geographical location doesn't help having so many other footie clubs in close proximity, thereby limiting the catchment area from a business perspective.

At the other extreme, Norwich for example have no competition in one of the largest counties in the country so are very investable.
Barnsley geographical location is similar to ours, how does that argument hold water?

7 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 14:27

BoltonTillIDie

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
MartinBWFC wrote:I think that once the Holdsworth shit has been cleared up, we will be a viable asset to buy into.

I agree - once this has all been sorted out we are much more attractive to any potential buyers

8 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 15:45

Natasha Whittam

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
BoltonTillIDie wrote:I agree - once this has all been sorted out we are much more attractive to any potential buyers

Not if they went on Saturday.

9 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 19:23

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
MartinBWFC wrote:
wanderlust wrote:Our geographical location doesn't help having so many other footie clubs in close proximity, thereby limiting the catchment area from a business perspective.

At the other extreme, Norwich for example have no competition in one of the largest counties in the country so are very investable.
Barnsley geographical location is similar to ours, how does that argument hold water?
They haven't got anything like the number of teams around them that BWFC have.

10 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 19:39

MartinBWFC

avatar
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
wanderlust wrote:
MartinBWFC wrote:
wanderlust wrote:Our geographical location doesn't help having so many other footie clubs in close proximity, thereby limiting the catchment area from a business perspective.

At the other extreme, Norwich for example have no competition in one of the largest counties in the country so are very investable.
Barnsley geographical location is similar to ours, how does that argument hold water?
They haven't got anything like the number of teams around them that BWFC have.
We've got both Manchester clubs, Wigan, Bury and possibly Blackburn, not a great deal to contend with there.

11 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Mon Aug 21 2017, 22:02

gloswhite

avatar
Youri Djorkaeff
Youri Djorkaeff
We'e got a better known history than 3 of them. It might help.

12 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Tue Aug 22 2017, 19:15

Kane57

avatar
Nicolas Anelka
Nicolas Anelka
Jack Dearden just said on the radio the takeover will be done by Tuesday. Presume that's a Kenny takeover and not the Indian gang.

13 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 00:17

Wanderers for 45


David Ngog
David Ngog
A wonderful ground,great history .We were on the verge of greatness with BSA ( Champions leauge) but Gartside was happy to bob along taking his £600-000 pay packet a year. Since 2008 freefalling.
Anyone with money welcome. Who do we get Del Boy and his loan and Ken Anderson. The poorest takeover in EFL history.
Only happen to us ( unfuckingbelievable)

14 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 13:40

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Strategically I'd imagine Anderson will continue to block new investors until someone is prepared to buy him out in one fell swoop for a lot of money

He knows if a billionaire comes in with a minority shareholding he'd be in trouble as they could use the reverse tactic to the one he used to get Deano's shares.

Works like this:
Say billionaire gets 5%.
Billionaire tables motions to massively increase investment in the club  e.g. to spend a further £half a billion to buy Messi and a few others.
Ken would have to match the billionaire £ for £ so would use his controlling interest to block the move. 
Then Ken either gets crucified in the media for preventing the club from spending more, finds the money from somewhere or gives up shares to the billionaire.

The last thing Ken wants is to have any big players with money to burn sniffing around the club

15 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 13:42

MartinBWFC

avatar
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
wanderlust wrote:Strategically I'd imagine Anderson will continue to block new investors until someone is prepared to buy him out in one fell swoop for a lot of money

He knows if a billionaire comes in with a minority shareholding he'd be in trouble as they could use the reverse tactic to the one he used to get Deano's shares.

Works like this:
Say billionaire gets 5%.
Billionaire tables motions to massively increase investment in the club  e.g. to spend a further £half a billion to buy Messi and a few others.
Ken would have to match the billionaire £ for £ so would use his controlling interest to block the move. 
Then Ken either gets crucified in the media for preventing the club from spending more, finds the money from somewhere or gives up shares to the billionaire.

The last thing Ken wants is to have any big players with money to burn sniffing around the club

I'd say that's exactly what he wants.

16 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 13:52

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
MartinBWFC wrote:
wanderlust wrote:Strategically I'd imagine Anderson will continue to block new investors until someone is prepared to buy him out in one fell swoop for a lot of money

He knows if a billionaire comes in with a minority shareholding he'd be in trouble as they could use the reverse tactic to the one he used to get Deano's shares.

Works like this:
Say billionaire gets 5%.
Billionaire tables motions to massively increase investment in the club  e.g. to spend a further £half a billion to buy Messi and a few others.
Ken would have to match the billionaire £ for £ so would use his controlling interest to block the move. 
Then Ken either gets crucified in the media for preventing the club from spending more, finds the money from somewhere or gives up shares to the billionaire.

The last thing Ken wants is to have any big players with money to burn sniffing around the club

I'd say that's exactly what he wants.

+1

Absolutely Martin.



Anyway who are these billionaires lining up to buy shares in the club?

The one that wanted Holdsworth shares owned a phone shop on Halliwell Road that went bust just a few years back.

17 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 13:56

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
MartinBWFC wrote:
wanderlust wrote:Strategically I'd imagine Anderson will continue to block new investors until someone is prepared to buy him out in one fell swoop for a lot of money

He knows if a billionaire comes in with a minority shareholding he'd be in trouble as they could use the reverse tactic to the one he used to get Deano's shares.

Works like this:
Say billionaire gets 5%.
Billionaire tables motions to massively increase investment in the club  e.g. to spend a further £half a billion to buy Messi and a few others.
Ken would have to match the billionaire £ for £ so would use his controlling interest to block the move. 
Then Ken either gets crucified in the media for preventing the club from spending more, finds the money from somewhere or gives up shares to the billionaire.

The last thing Ken wants is to have any big players with money to burn sniffing around the club

I'd say that's exactly what he wants.
Why?

18 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 13:58

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
wanderlust wrote:
MartinBWFC wrote:
wanderlust wrote:Strategically I'd imagine Anderson will continue to block new investors until someone is prepared to buy him out in one fell swoop for a lot of money

He knows if a billionaire comes in with a minority shareholding he'd be in trouble as they could use the reverse tactic to the one he used to get Deano's shares.

Works like this:
Say billionaire gets 5%.
Billionaire tables motions to massively increase investment in the club  e.g. to spend a further £half a billion to buy Messi and a few others.
Ken would have to match the billionaire £ for £ so would use his controlling interest to block the move. 
Then Ken either gets crucified in the media for preventing the club from spending more, finds the money from somewhere or gives up shares to the billionaire.

The last thing Ken wants is to have any big players with money to burn sniffing around the club

I'd say that's exactly what he wants.

Why?

Are you for real???

So he can sell them his shares and make a mint.

Good luck to him too if he can make that happen.

19 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 14:52

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Sluffy wrote:
wanderlust wrote:
MartinBWFC wrote:
wanderlust wrote:Strategically I'd imagine Anderson will continue to block new investors until someone is prepared to buy him out in one fell swoop for a lot of money

He knows if a billionaire comes in with a minority shareholding he'd be in trouble as they could use the reverse tactic to the one he used to get Deano's shares.

Works like this:
Say billionaire gets 5%.
Billionaire tables motions to massively increase investment in the club  e.g. to spend a further £half a billion to buy Messi and a few others.
Ken would have to match the billionaire £ for £ so would use his controlling interest to block the move. 
Then Ken either gets crucified in the media for preventing the club from spending more, finds the money from somewhere or gives up shares to the billionaire.

The last thing Ken wants is to have any big players with money to burn sniffing around the club

I'd say that's exactly what he wants.

Why?

Are you for real???

So he can sell them his shares and make a mint.

Good luck to him too if he can make that happen.

20 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:01

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
God knows what the hell you are talking about.

First you want minority investment - to buy Holdsworth shares.

Then you say minority investors would be stupid and totally fucked by KA.

Then you say you want a billionaire minority investment.

Then you say that's the last thing Anderson wants sniffing around.

When pointed out that is almost certainly what Anderson DOES want you say - yeah that's what you've said!

You're more of a mentalist that Cameron the vlogger!

Rolling Eyes

21 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:19

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Sluffy wrote:God knows what the hell you are talking about.
And not only God. Fortunately most people are able to understand concepts with more than one premise too.

22 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:25

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
wanderlust wrote:
Sluffy wrote:God knows what the hell you are talking about.
And not only God. Fortunately most people are able to understand concepts with more than one premise too.

I'm still laughing at your premise that some random billionaire wanted to buy a minority share in the club and Anderson blocked him by asking the billionaire for a miserly five thousand to look at the books.

You're away with the fairies mate.






23 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:30

karlypants

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Laughing

24 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:37

Natasha Whittam

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Mods mocking posters is not on. I seriously suggest you stop it.

25 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:38

Norpig

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
The Sluffy & Lusty love in continues i see

26 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:39

karlypants

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Natasha Whittam wrote:Mods mocking posters is not on. I seriously suggest you stop it.
Are you feeling left out or something? Very Happy

27 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:40

Natasha Whittam

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
It doesn't do the site any favours when one of the mods is mocking a user simply because he doesn't agree with something that was written.

28 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:45

Norpig

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
it's like a battle of the ego's, neither wants to admit they're wrong

29 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:47

boltonbonce

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

30 Re: Takeovers - why not us? on Wed Sep 13 2017, 15:52

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
Natasha Whittam wrote:It doesn't do the site any favours when one of the mods is mocking a user simply because he doesn't agree with something that was written.

At least I'm not closing threads and even banning them like one mod I know used to do.

And even if I am gently mocking him that's nothing compared to the personal abuse of being called a fascist and a moron which he's thrown at me for simply disagreeing with him.

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum