Bolton Wanderers Fans Forum

You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers Banter » In ken we trust - or not

In ken we trust - or not

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Ken, saint, sinner or undecided

63% 63% [ 15 ]
13% 13% [ 3 ]
24% 24% [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 24

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

1 In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 15:59

Guest


Guest
Ok so it been going back and forth and i dont want people just voting i want their reasons for their vote.

For me personally ken has said difficult decisions would have to be made (sale of clough and holden) and that sacrifices would have to be made to meet the criteria set out by the efl.

If anyone was  hero in that courtroom nearly 2 years ago it was Ken.  Stepping forward when deanos dodgy mate pulled out.

As for him taking money out of the club......the same money he has put in to resolve cash flow problems paying non playing staffs wages etc.

The press and various blogging sites have always been on deanos side and now theyve been found to have got it completely wrong are still on the back of ken.

Anyway, you decide.

2 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 16:13

MartinBWFC

avatar
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
No reason not to trust him thus far, however he has a lot to prove in the coming months, but as I say so far so good.

3 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 16:16

Natasha Whittam

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I sit somewhere in the middle.

Grateful to Ken for saving the club, but I don't think he's doing this out of the kindness of his heart.

If the club survives and he fooks off having made a tidy sum then fair enough.

4 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 16:27

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
In simple terms, Davies left just enough debt in the club so no one could asset strip it.

Holdsworth took out the BM loan expecting some investment in SSBWFC within the week to pay back BM.

For whatever reasons that didn't happen and we've been lumbered with divided owners and a loan with something like 30% interest repayments ever since.

Holdsworth has not been able (or willing) to put anything into the club.

Anderson thus had to protect his position.

Which he has whilst keeping the club afloat even if that meant selling off players.

Now that Holdsworth has been removed and Anderson has basically full ownership - he can now invest fully into the club and/or seek outside investors.

If he can not asset strip due to Davies residual debt being on the books - his only way to make a profit for himself is to make the club attractive to an outside investor.

He won't be doing that by loading the club with debt or selling off whatever assets he can.

Up to now Anderson's kept the club afloat - unlike Holdsworth.

He's the only thing we've got, kept us going, brought in Parkinson and players such as Beevers, got us promoted and even strengthened the squad further for this season.

Anderson doing well means the club is doing well so I can't see any reason why we shouldn't trust him - after all he owns the club now and he'll want his asset to appreciate in value too!

5 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 16:33

Guest


Guest
Just a quick one.

Nat, did you vote for bad for the club?

6 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 16:55

Natasha Whittam

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
y2johnny wrote:Just a quick one.

Nat, did you vote for bad for the club?

Don't be fooking nosey.

7 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 16:59

Guest


Guest
Natasha Whittam wrote:
y2johnny wrote:Just a quick one.

Nat, did you vote for bad for the club?

Don't be fooking nosey.
I didnt think you did thats all


Just there has been one vote bad for the club and no reason.

8 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 17:09

karlypants

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I voted good for the club BTW. Smile

9 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 17:25

Natasha Whittam

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
karlypants wrote:I voted good for the club BTW. Smile

No one cares.

10 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 17:30

Guest


Guest
Natasha Whittam wrote:
karlypants wrote:I voted good for the club BTW. Smile

No one cares.
I do

11 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 18:24

observer


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Natasha Whittam wrote:I sit somewhere in the middle.

Grateful to Ken for saving the club, but I don't think he's doing this out of the kindness of his heart.

If the club survives and he fooks off having made a tidy sum then fair enough.
Absolutely agree with Nat.  He is entitled to make money... but he has to make sure we survive... good for the fans and even better for his future sale.

12 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 18:43

Kane57

avatar
Nicolas Anelka
Nicolas Anelka
Completely in the middle. Appreciate what he's done but wouldn't trust him a single inch

13 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 19:19

Guest


Guest
I can understand people being cautious and undecided but i cant understand people looking for a reason to doubt him.  Of course he is looking to make a profit. Nothing wrong with that. He isnt a bolton "fan" in fact i dont even know who he does really support.  To him it is a business arrangement and like sluffy has said he is under that much scrutiny he has to do the right thing to;

1) satisfy the efl

2) if he does want to make a profit.

Which i hope he does on both counts.

14 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sat Sep 02 2017, 19:37

wessy

avatar
Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Good for the club without a doubt, with minutes to go before being wound up, in that position we were screwed without him, for a guy without a pot to piss in, he is a formidable operator, From that position he is slowly starting to stabalise the club.

15 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 01:35

BoltonTillIDie

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
I always assumed he didn't want to commit financially because why should he when his partner never did.  Why should a business partner benefit from him contributing when he wasnt.  So now let's see if things change.  Whatever he does now will be for
The benefit of himself and ultimately the club

16 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 12:10

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Undecided as I've been saying all week.

Don't mind him making money but do mind him blocking new inward investment to do it which if the media allegations turn out to be true would mean he's starving the club and team of finances to gain personal power which obviously I'd disapprove of as BWFC suffers as a result.

I'll decide about Anderson when the details of the deal come out.


BTW the question is about whether or not we think he's good for the club or not.
If the question was do we trust him or not I'd say definitely not.
You should change the title of the thread so it's the same as the question.

17 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:02

Norpig

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
I trust him to put the club on an even keel then sell up as he knows he can't finance the club on his own going forward. If he makes a profit on selling on then fair play to him as God knows where we would be without him coming in.
He's always been upfront and communicated everything that has gone on, the only real issue i has was his washing his dirty laundry in public with Deano but he came out and admitted it should and could have been handled better.
As for future investment, if these other parties are not happy with KA not allowing access to the books then they need to flash the cash. It's right for KA to be cautious and not let someone without proper funds get their hands on the club.

18 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:07

Guest


Guest
Norpig wrote:I trust him to put the club on an even keel then sell up as he knows he can't finance the club on his own going forward. If he makes a profit on selling on then fair play to him as God knows where we would be without him coming in.
He's always been upfront and communicated everything that has gone on, the only real issue i has was his washing his dirty laundry in public with Deano but he came out and admitted it should and could have been handled better.
As for future investment, if these other parties are not happy with KA not allowing access to the books then they need to flash the cash. It's right for KA to be cautious and not let someone without proper funds get their hands on the club.
:clap:

19 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:08

Guest


Guest
wanderlust wrote:Undecided as I've been saying all week.

Don't mind him making money but do mind him blocking new inward investment to do it which if the media allegations turn out to be true would mean he's starving the club and team of finances to gain personal power which obviously I'd disapprove of as BWFC suffers as a result.

I'll decide about Anderson when the details of the deal come out.


BTW the question is about whether or not we think he's good for the club or not.
If the question was do we trust him or not I'd say definitely not.
You should change the title of the thread so it's the same as the question.
:rofl:

Jog on

20 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:22

boltonbonce

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Anderson was disqualified as a director for eight years. Reasons:
Diverting company funds into personal accounts.
VAT discrepancies.
Failure to cooperate with receivers.

I've happily given him a chance,but do I trust him? No.

21 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:24

Guest


Guest
But do you beleive everything wrote about him by the trust, iles and lov

22 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:29

boltonbonce

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
y2johnny wrote:But do you beleive everything wrote about him by the trust, iles and lov
No. But the facts I've quoted are enough to give me concern.
Hence,my lack of trust.
These aren't allegations,they're facts.

23 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:36

Natasha Whittam

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Johnny, you seem to be going all out to paint Ken as the Second Coming - yet Bonce has just posted why we should all be cautious. Just accept it.

24 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:38

Guest


Guest
boltonbonce wrote:
y2johnny wrote:But do you beleive everything wrote about him by the trust, iles and lov
No. But the facts I've quoted are enough to give me concern.
Hence,my lack of trust.
These aren't allegations,they're facts.
No i know.  Im not arguing with you bonce.  The difference between you and lusty is youve quoted FACTS lusty has just regurgitated speculative articles.

25 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 13:38

Guest


Guest
Natasha Whittam wrote:Johnny, you seem to be going all out to paint Ken as the Second Coming - yet Bonce has just posted why we should all be cautious. Just accept it.
And i accept that. Bonce has quoted a fact.  Something others are yet to do.

26 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 14:33

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
boltonbonce wrote:
y2johnny wrote:But do you beleive everything wrote about him by the trust, iles and lov
No. But the facts I've quoted are enough to give me concern.
Hence,my lack of trust.
These aren't allegations,they're facts.

I would think that anybody with Anderson's past record would be a 'marked man' so to speak, someone to be extra vigilant about if you are the regulators who oversee compliance of the rules and regs.

I can't believe a) that he believes he can get up to something dodgy whilst being in this spot light and b) that even in the remotest possibility that he might, that the EFL wouldn't be on to him immediately!

It's the quiet ones that are the worst they say, and Anderson with his previous 'rap sheet' of misdemeanours is certainly in the public eye!

The odds are highly stacked that he is doing nothing fiscally illegal at BWFC imo otherwise why has both the people with the greatest debt in the club (Davies and the liquidator in respect of BM) plus the sports governing authority (EFL), all continue to work happily with him?

If Davies, the liquidator and EFL (all who deal with the man and his books on an ongoing basis), continue to monitor and trust him then why can't people who have never met the bloke and apparently believe negative gossip about him on social media, don't?

I rather deal in current reality than conjecture personally or something (bad) that happened a decade ago.

27 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Sun Sep 03 2017, 17:52

Fabians Right Peg

avatar
Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Got to be good for the club, even if he is in it for a profit then he will have to run the club in a manner that will deliver him the most profit when he sells up. It's in his interest to see us do well, the transfers this window where disappointing but the last window we did good business thanks partly to his links within football, so far I see little to say he is not doing the best for the club.

28 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Tue Sep 05 2017, 14:51

wanderlust

avatar
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Sluffy wrote:
boltonbonce wrote:
y2johnny wrote:But do you beleive everything wrote about him by the trust, iles and lov
No. But the facts I've quoted are enough to give me concern.
Hence,my lack of trust.
These aren't allegations,they're facts.

I would think that anybody with Anderson's past record would be a 'marked man' so to speak, someone to be extra vigilant about if you are the regulators who oversee compliance of the rules and regs.

I can't believe a) that he believes he can get up to something dodgy whilst being in this spot light and b) that even in the remotest possibility that he might, that the EFL wouldn't be on to him immediately!

It's the quiet ones that are the worst they say, and Anderson with his previous 'rap sheet' of misdemeanours is certainly in the public eye!

The odds are highly stacked that he is doing nothing fiscally illegal at BWFC imo otherwise why has both the people with the greatest debt in the club (Davies and the liquidator in respect of BM) plus the sports governing authority (EFL), all continue to work happily with him?

If Davies, the liquidator and EFL (all who deal with the man and his books on an ongoing basis), continue to monitor and trust him then why can't people who have never met the bloke and apparently believe negative gossip about him on social media, don't?

I rather deal in current reality than conjecture personally or something (bad) that happened a decade ago.
This is an interesting turn of events. I had assumed Johnny and Sluffy knew about his track record as I thought it was brought up at the time he bought into the club and that Iles etc were simply regurgitating old concerns.

There are several reasons why the EFL and the numerous creditors including Eddie and the Warby's have tolerated him and will continue to deal with him including the fact that the last thing they (lifetime supporters) want to happen is for our historic club to go down the pan - which it would if they called in the debts - and that with all creditors Anderson can always play the "eff off or I'll run the club into the ground and you'll get nothing" card.

And seeing as he's taken control of nett assets worth in the region of £43 million (in 2016) for peanuts, and has absolute power over a now impotent Board, he can do pretty much what he wants.

Perhaps the EFL is prepared to trust him enough to lift the embargo?  :yeahright:

The fact is that the club's fate is in the hands of a man who has history of pocketing the company's money and that's not something to be thrilled about, even if you're halfway up his duodenum.

29 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Tue Sep 05 2017, 15:15

Sluffy

avatar
Admin
wanderlust wrote:
Sluffy wrote:
boltonbonce wrote:
y2johnny wrote:But do you beleive everything wrote about him by the trust, iles and lov
No. But the facts I've quoted are enough to give me concern.
Hence,my lack of trust.
These aren't allegations,they're facts.

I would think that anybody with Anderson's past record would be a 'marked man' so to speak, someone to be extra vigilant about if you are the regulators who oversee compliance of the rules and regs.

I can't believe a) that he believes he can get up to something dodgy whilst being in this spot light and b) that even in the remotest possibility that he might, that the EFL wouldn't be on to him immediately!

It's the quiet ones that are the worst they say, and Anderson with his previous 'rap sheet' of misdemeanours is certainly in the public eye!

The odds are highly stacked that he is doing nothing fiscally illegal at BWFC imo otherwise why has both the people with the greatest debt in the club (Davies and the liquidator in respect of BM) plus the sports governing authority (EFL), all continue to work happily with him?

If Davies, the liquidator and EFL (all who deal with the man and his books on an ongoing basis), continue to monitor and trust him then why can't people who have never met the bloke and apparently believe negative gossip about him on social media, don't?

I rather deal in current reality than conjecture personally or something (bad) that happened a decade ago.
This is an interesting turn of events. I had assumed Johnny and Sluffy knew about his track record as I thought it was brought up at the time he bought into the club and that Iles etc were simply regurgitating old concerns.

There are several reasons why the EFL and the numerous creditors including Eddie and the Warby's have tolerated him and will continue to deal with him including the fact that the last thing they (lifetime supporters) want to happen is for our historic club to go down the pan - which it would if they called in the debts - and that with all creditors Anderson can always play the "eff off or I'll run the club into the ground and you'll get nothing" card.

And seeing as he's taken control of nett assets worth in the region of £43 million (in 2016) for peanuts, and has absolute power over a now impotent Board, he can do pretty much what he wants.

Perhaps the EFL is prepared to trust him enough to lift the embargo?  :yeahright:

The fact is that the club's fate is in the hands of a man who has history of pocketing the company's money and that's not something to be thrilled about, even if you're halfway up his duodenum.

What the fuck are you on about - have you been drinking?

Of course I know (presumably Johnny too) about Anderson's history - that is the whole point behind my last post on this thread!!!

As for the embargo we've already brought in one more player than the maximum allowed under their new rules - which seems to suggest the EFL must think he's doing something right!

Good of you to show your homophobic colours though.

Quite frankly I'm not surprised either.


30 Re: In ken we trust - or not on Tue Sep 05 2017, 15:20

Norpig

avatar
John McGinlay
John McGinlay
Easy Sluffy saying Lusty is homophobic is a bit of a reach! He just means we are all too blinkered to believe KA would use the club as a cash cow and strip us bare. I can see his point but i'm nowhere near as suspicious as Lusty  Very Happy

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