These bloody accounts!

Tweet from Iles just now -

As things stand, #bwfc's overdue accounts have not been filed. Told it will happen by end of today - but heard that a few times this week.

I don't know what they can change at the last minute that would make a huge difference so I'm left wondering why the delay?

Ken's not finished turning the sevens into ones yet.

Nice to see that the first response of the ST board members is to tweet for ENFORCEMENT of the judgements!

(Daniel Izza @dsizza)

Almost as though they want the club to fail.

Seems the accounts (for 2015 I think?) have been submitted - tweet from Iles -

Looks as if #bwfc can expect a fine for late submission if -as is being claimed at the Macron- the accounts have gone in at Companies House.

Didn't I read somewhere that the accounts can be filed but wouldn't be public for a further couple of weeks? Let's hope they have been. At least to bugger up the ST's plans to take over the world.

Bollotom2014 wrote:Didn't I read somewhere that the accounts can be filed but wouldn't be public for a further couple of weeks? Let's hope they have been. At least to bugger up the ST's plans to take over the world.

That's because the people at Companies House give a standard fortnight to scan and upload. Nothing more malicious than that.

Sluffy wrote:Seems the accounts (for 2015 I think?) have been submitted - tweet from Iles -

Looks as if #bwfc can expect a fine for late submission if -as is being claimed at the Macron- the accounts have gone in at Companies House.

The fine is £1500 for a private company and £7500 if its a plc if the accounts are filed more than 6 months late. I'm not sure what the status of BWFC holding company is. I suspect its a plc but don't have time to check.
If they're filed more than 6 months late in the following year then the fine doubles.
 It won't make any difference in real terms. It's still  less than Mark Davies weekly wage for not playing.

Bolton Wanderers could face punishment from Companies House over late financial accounts

BOLTON Wanderers could still face punishment despite claiming to have filed their overdue accounts last night.

Club chairman Ken Anderson will announce this morning that the long-awaited financial information has now been passed on to Companies House, more than a year since it was first due.

The accounts, which take into consideration the final financial period under previous owner Eddie Davies, will be available for public viewing two to three days after submission by the club’s auditors Deloitte.

But a spokesperson for Companies House confirmed yesterday that a fine is still highly likely for Wanderers’ directors Ken Anderson and Dean Holdsworth.

“We are taking appropriate enforcement action to secure the filing of the overdue accounts. Our main aim is to secure compliance and bring the filing records up to date and we are taking the appropriate action to achieve this. Failure to deliver accounts on time is a criminal offence. All the directors of the company risk prosecution. On conviction, a director could end up with a criminal record and a potentially unlimited fine for each offence. This is separate from the civil penalty imposed on the company for late filing of accounts.”

Filing the accounting information - which is required by law for all companies in the UK - has proved problematic for Wanderers, with Anderson claiming on September 3 last year that they were “ready to go”.

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

It's a joke at this point.  They are deliberately being held off until the last second. Can only imagine that there is something in the accounts that KA doesn't want us to see. No idea what that could be ....it's a bloody football club, hotel and a parking lot....not IBM or Ford.
I'm open to all theories as to why we are still not filed. Mine is that Ken was hoping to sell us on before this hit the deadline.

It's been an inordinate delay and given the potential impact on the club I would assume that KA has had the accountants poring over them non stop - which suggests there must be something horrendous in there otherwise they'd have been submitted a year ago.

I can only surmise that KA is trying to get as much debt as possible written off, tax liabilities cut to the bone and generally doing whatever he can to minimise the impact on the club going forward - but I'm not confident he'll get away with it so I am expecting some ructions from this.

terenceanne wrote:It's a joke at this point.  They are deliberately being held off until the last second. Can only imagine that there is something in the accounts that KA doesn't want us to see. No idea what that could be ....it's a bloody football club, hotel and a parking lot....not IBM or Ford.
I'm open to all theories as to why we are still not filed. Mine is that Ken was hoping to sell us on before this hit the deadline.

This is my guess as to what has happened.

The agreement was for Sports Shield to come up with £5 million from Holdsworth, with Anderson putting in a further £2.5 million during the season.

It all went wrong right from the beginning when Holdsworth secured his loan on BWFC assets and did not have the money to pay back the loan repayments by SS.

This meant the club had to be fully financed by Anderson or go into Admin.

The sale of Holding plus the £5 million and ST income/gate receipts kept us going with Anderson looking to get DH to hand over his shares (because he basically did nothing that anyone else could have done - including Anderson himself) and sell the club on asap.

DH wanted a deal (£1 million to him someone said on here once) then found out that the loan deal with BluMarble was not able to be transferred / bought off - because SS had no assets and they already had their claws into the club and would not let go until it was made worth their while.

KA being rightly furious with DH if this was indeed the case - hence the bad apparent bad blood between them.

KA knew that if he put his money in and the club went into Admin he would lose it, so tried to keep his hand in his pocket as long as he could.

Pro Holdsworth and anti KA - such as the ST, Iles (imo), and Manning and his mates at Lov - wanted to make out KA was the bad guy in all of this by not coughing up his £2.5 million.

The shit hit the fan before Christmas when the usual suspects announced the wages had not been made.

They were paid and paid every month since - so it seems to me - whether the anti KA's like it or not - that he has put his hand in his pocket.

The sale of Clough seems to have come about because KA is having to fund the club alone, and take on Holdsworth debt by either having to pay off the BluMarble loan or put money aside for court action.

What seems clear in all this is in my opinion is that Holdsworth never had any money, nor has SS, and whatever personal wealth he and SS has, comes nowhere near to the debt outstanding to Blumarble.

Seems that BWFC and/or Anderson will have to take the hit on this whilst DH still sits there with 50% ownership of the club - and surely that wouldn't be fair or right to my way of thinking.

The 2015 Accounts are available here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Health warning- they are not a pretty sight

rammywhite wrote:The 2015 Accounts are available here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Health warning- they are not a pretty sight

As I said a long time ago the reason for holding up the filing of the Accounts was the inability of the auditors to give a clean audit report based on the uncertainty that the business is a 'going concern'
I'm not going to brag about my opinion being correct here, but having an audit report like this where Deloitte refuse  to give an opinion is not unexpected- but is a matter for  genuine concern. Auditors do not qualify their Reports willingly( I trained as a CA with one of the big 4 auditing firms so I've been involved with this) and so this is a serious issue for the club.
There  also seems to be a disagreement between the directors and the auditors about whether the business is a going concern- again that's an issue to worry about.
The qualified audit report will have serious consequences in any attempt to source funds from another investor on purely commercial grounds.
The future looks quite pessimistic to me.

rammywhite wrote:The 2015 Accounts are available here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Health warning- they are not a pretty sight

Deloitte's have stated that they hadn't been given access to the information they require to fulfill their obligation as an independent auditor if I read this correctly. Does that mean that the accounts won't be accepted Rammy? What is the current HMRC attitude towards such a disclaimer?

Rammy care to explain in simple English for dullards like myself what this all means? It would be most appreciated 

It looks pretty bleak Rammy. I,like many other supporters not too savvy when it comes to club finances,tend to lean toward a Micawberish ethos of 'something's bound to turn up'.
Seeing this in black and white,I'm starting to think that,whatever does turn up might be very very unwelcome.

Wow!

Chairman’s response to Sports Shield statement and accounts year ended 30 June 2015



I have seen the comments that Dean has made concerning my web notes and whilst I also do not wish to become embroiled in a public debate with him, (as I think that this is best done through our respective lawyers) there are certain elements of his comments that I believe I need to respond to.

This is a shame as like Dean, for the benefit of the club and the supporters, I would have preferred to keep the details of our dispute out of the press, but unfortunately, the filing of the accounts by Deloitte and recent events have made this impossible. 

I do not accept that my comments were 'misleading and without foundation', I merely stated the facts, as I saw them.
 
In light of my openness to this matter, the accounts for the year ended 30 June 2015 are now available for supporters of the club to look at by CLICKING HERE.

Firstly, as I have learnt to expect from statements and comments from Dean over a period of time, he is very economical with the truth. On numerous occasions from the very outset, back in March 2016, when we both became directors/shareholders, Dean has been requested to personally contribute towards the club's ongoing funding requirements, alongside me.

However, he has always declined to contribute, even when he was full time employed (as the highest paid club employee, outside of players) and actively involved in the day-to-day operations, so fully aware of the club's financial position.

Once again, for the record, unlike Dean, who has taken substantial monies (circa £1.5m) out of the club, one way or the other, I have never taken a salary despite working virtually full time and tirelessly on both club and hotel matters. 

Apart from when I have been away on holiday, I have attended virtually every home and away game this season. The same cannot be said for Dean, who has been conspicuous by his absence at many games and comments have been made by others about this.

Dean and I have discussed the sale of various players since day one. I do accept though that we did not specifically discuss Zach Clough on transfer deadline day. However, how else did he think the club could survive financially and pay the salaries and ongoing running costs, once he had made it absolutely clear that he was not prepared to fund the business alongside me? 

He is more than welcome to contact me whenever he wishes to discuss football, or any other matters, but has chosen not to. Indeed, he has little or no contact with me, the manager or other staff. I have never stopped him talking to any of the staff.

As for his comments about not receiving financial information, this has been provided to him by both Anthony Massey and John Pelling in the past and is still readily available to him, but unfortunately, he has never made himself available to attend board meetings, despite numerous requests. 

Furthermore, once we became suspicious that Dean might be leaking sensitive financial information, we took the decision to only make financial information available to him at the club premises or board meetings and not in emails etc. I am always prepared to meet with Dean on a weekly basis, or monthly at a board meeting to discuss anything if he so wishes.

Dean is and has always been aware of the club's ongoing current and past financial requirements, and was asked to contribute, alongside me again, only last week to help pay the salaries etc. But as is becoming the norm, he failed to respond to emails, (he is very selective in what he does and doesn't respond to) which therefore left me with little or no choice but to reluctantly sell Zach Clough, for the reasons I have previously explained.

Dean is correct in saying that the short term loans that I made to the club have subsequently been repaid, but at least l can say I have continuously advanced interest free, unsecured funds to the club to ensure that salaries etc were paid, whereas, he has declined, or failed to respond, on each and every occasion, that he was requested to assist. 

The substantial monies that I have provided, as and when required, have been referred to in the notes to the accounts that Deloitte have now filed and which are available to download from our website.

Again, for the record, Dean has never put any personal money into the club. He did arrange with Michael Collins, a Sports Shield consultant and an associate of his (now serving a four years and three months prison sentence for mortgage fraud) a £4m loan to the club through his own company Sports Shield repayable in March 2018, but unlike my loans, he secured the loan on behalf of Blu Marble against club assets for £5m plus interest at 24% per annum. 

Like my funds, this loan has to be repaid but at a cost of several million pounds in interest, arrangement and exit fees!

Dean failed to tell us that the loan he had obtained from BluMarble to Sports Shield on or about the 10th March 2016, was repayable (as I now understand and believe) on the 26th March 2016, only 16 days later, but subsequently changed, I now understand and believe to the 24th April 2016, at an interest rate of 30% per annum. This has also been referred to in the notes to the accounts filed by Deloitte, earlier this week.

Dean also failed to tell us at the time, about a subsequent side letter he/Sports Shield had signed with BluMarble.  As it currently stands, Sports Shield have failed to repay the BluMarble loan and are therefore, technically, as I understand it, in default and the club may be called upon in respect of the guarantees Dean/Sports Shield provided. I am disputing the validity and legality of these guarantees. This has been also referred to in the notes to the accounts, filed by Deloitte.

I find it very interesting that Dean should comment about 'prior approval of the board issues', as he personally and solely signed the loan agreement, on behalf of his company Sports Shield and also as a director, on behalf of the club (i.e. he signed solely, on behalf of both parties)  without my prior authorisation, or knowledge of the agreement, with no board meeting having ever taken  place, or anything  being minuted. 

As previously stated, the legality of these documents are disputed by me and will be challenged through the courts.

As the notes to the accounts suggest, there are a number of post balance sheet items which are disputed between the directors and to which I have previously referred to, that will be the subject of future litigation. Unfortunately, until these are resolved, I am unable to comment on them, other than to say that in my opinion, they are not commercially prudent or in the club's best interests.

As regards, Dean's comments about the delays in completing the audit and filing of the accounts, I am happy to say that he is mainly to blame for this.

Ken

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

he doesn't hold back does he? I wish they would stop airing their dirty laundry in public though.