[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I don’t. They simply shouldn’t be involved in running a football club. As Allardyce said, BWFC needs owners with the requisite finances. We certainly don’t need a cowboy with a track record of asset stripping for personal gain. How Anderson passed the “fit persons” test given his history I’ll never know, but that’s water under the bridge and now we’re stuck with him.
That's your problem right there!
You've had a preconceived view of Anderson right from the very start and blindly carry that on no matter what and 'bend' the facts to fit your agenda rather than accept them for what really is happening.
TWO people took on the club from Davies with a commitment to put £7.5 million investment into it - £5 million up front from Holdsworth and £2.5 million (if further money was required) from Anderson.
That simply never happened because Holdsworth DIDN'T 'invest' into the club - he simply took a loan out against current assets!
Can any reasonable person expect Anderson to chuck in £2.5 million of his OWN money after that? If you were in his shoes wouldn't you be saying where's YOUR £5 million Dean because you aren't seeing a penny of my money until YOU uphold your side of the bargain. Just take it out as another payday loan Dean against the clubs assets just like you did - oh but wait you can't pay the monthly instalments on the one you've already taken out can you? So if you aren't going to be putting anything in and I'm certainly not until you do - then the club is in an even worse mess than if we hadn't taken it on at all!
So you end up with a club having a need of £5 to 7.5 million from two owners/investors and end up with NO investment from one of them and the other eventually having to pay out (from the club and/or his own pocket) at least £1 million to get shut of the 'chancer' who had made things worse for a club that was already a financial basket case to begin with!!!
If Anderson had thought from the very beginning he had to invest a potential £7.5 million of his own money into the club in the first place he may very well have not got involved because he may very well hadn't that sort of money to risk, or simply hadn't got that money at all?
Rightly or wrongly it seems to me that through no obvious fault of his own he's ended up with a club he never intended to be sole owner of which he never had the funds and/or intent to invest more that £2.5 million in, which I interpret from the wording of the original agreement ('if required') meant to fund cash flow as and when needed - and not a one off cash injection.
So he's made the best for himself from the position he's found himself in, he's paid off Holdsworth, kept the club afloat through player sales, covered cash flow (when he's known he is sure to get his money back), got the club close to financially being breakeven - he will achieve that from next season on when we finally get shut of Amos's £16k per week salary - and still has an asset that he can sell on (if only he can find a genuine buyer for a club that has traditionally a limited support based in a catchment area of super clubs like United, City and possibly even Liverpool).
If he was ever going to do a runner he would have done it long before now don't you think - what's £50k per month (which the anti-Anderson's believe he's taking) to a man who is a tax exile in Switzerland, owns a property in Monaco and owns a ocean going yacht?
He's here to turn a profit on the club not to run it into the ground! He's after millions (about £5 million) from a sale if he can not a few ten of thousand from the petty cash each month.
But then again the old saying still holds true that there are non so blind that those that will not see - and those are the one's so prejudist against Anderson from day one that they've chosen not to see what the true picture is.