OFFICIAL CLUB SOLD TO FV!!!!!

T.R.O.Y wrote:If that theory is correct the man really is a complete snake, but we already knew that.

And no if I had no legitimate claim to a payout (obviously no idea what Kens is), I would not bleed the club dry and out other peoples livelihoods at risk to maximise my own profit - that’s what cunts do.

Don't see why you think he's a snake?

He stands to lose £3.5m that is quite legally and genuinely owed to him as a secured creditor in the club - however the only way he will get the money out that he put in, is if the price of the asset can cover in full both the head creditor, then him.

The thing is though as it stood it didn't.

So he manipulated a bidding war for the asset (the hotel) in order to inflate its price and get his money back.

Nothing at all wrong in doing that - he simply wants back to money he put in.

All quite legal and above board.

That's how the business world works.

Why should he walk away from £3.5m that is his, without at least trying to get it back?

That's how the real world works - and I doubt you would walk away from £3.5m that was your money and owed to you, without some sort of a fight for it.

I certainly wouldn't.

Norpig wrote:But by doing all his so called legitimate ways of getting £3.5 million he is jeopardising the sale and the season ahead. 
The more i think on it the more i think this was his plan all along. He never had the cash to finance the club long term and unless someone else knows more than me then i don't believe he ever put in that amount of his own money.
I know it's all very black and white for you Sluffy but i and many other on here see it much more emotionally than you do. I'm not saying i love BWFC more than you do but you see it in a very business minded way when most of the rest of us just see our club we have supported for many years in danger of going down the pan.

He put the money in Norpig - there is no doubt about that - there is documentation to prove that - 

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

To me the basic issue here is that the 'bubble' that is football, and which most fans such as your good self live in, has crashed into the real world of hard nosed businessmen that I guess I live in.

The idealised fantasy of running a football club without a benevolent owner bubble has popped and landed in the world of reality at last.

Anderson is quite rightly and sensibly trying not to lose £3.5m of his money, when he doesn't have to - that's the reality of things. I would do the same - and if it was your £3.5m, you would do the same too.

We lived the dream - but now we are in the real world and having to pay the price.

No doubt Anderson has not been a saint but he hasn't been proved to be the rape and pillaging Devil that many have claimed.

I tend to deal with facts and legalities not emotions and morals.

I'm also from a generation that doesn't take what some muppet on social media as gospel (particularly if it comes from people with a clear agenda like Iles and the ST) I honestly still can't comprehend how people can't think for themselves and feel the need to take some random's word on FB or twitter as being the truth.  I'm not sure if they do that because they are too lazy to check things for themselves, too stupid to realise that not everything said on social media is correct - or both!

I've had a great deal of stick and abuse thrown at me over the last three years but I've stuck by my guns and sought the truth of the matter, taking no sides - but often finding little to no fault in Anderson's actions in law.

You and many others have judged him in a different way to me and come to your own conclusions but in the real world the law is the arbitrator and as I've continually said, Anderson has not seemed from what we have known, to have broken it.

I see that Martin is telling Wanders Ways that I'm still a big Ken lover but he simply is too thick doesn't understand that I don't love or hate Anderson, I merely comment on the reality of the situation in law.

Seems two sets of different Administrators, one with ten forensic accountants meticulously going through the books, have come to the same conclusions.

Are they Ken lovers too then?

Clearly not, just impartial judges on how he's ran his company - in much the same way as I've been trying to explain to anyone who would listen on here - until I gave it up as not worth the bother anymore.

Sluffy wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:If that theory is correct the man really is a complete snake, but we already knew that.

And no if I had no legitimate claim to a payout (obviously no idea what Kens is), I would not bleed the club dry and out other peoples livelihoods at risk to maximise my own profit - that’s what cunts do.

Don't see why you think he's a snake?

He stands to lose £3.5m that is quite legally and genuinely owed to him as a secured creditor in the club - however the only way he will get the money out that he put in, is if the price of the asset can cover in full both the head creditor, then him.

The thing is though as it stood it didn't.

So he manipulated a bidding war for the asset (the hotel) in order to inflate its price and get his money back.

Nothing at all wrong in doing that - he simply wants back to money he put in.

All quite legal and above board.

That's how the business world works.

Why should he walk away from £3.5m that is his, without at least trying to get it back?

That's how the real world works - and I doubt you would walk away from £3.5m that was your money and owed to you, without some sort of a fight for it.

I certainly wouldn't.

That’s why my point was hinged around the legitimacy of his claim. Last thing I read was that the value of Ken’s claim was unconfirmed - might have missed this changing though.

T.R.O.Y wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:If that theory is correct the man really is a complete snake, but we already knew that.

And no if I had no legitimate claim to a payout (obviously no idea what Kens is), I would not bleed the club dry and out other peoples livelihoods at risk to maximise my own profit - that’s what cunts do.

Don't see why you think he's a snake?

He stands to lose £3.5m that is quite legally and genuinely owed to him as a secured creditor in the club - however the only way he will get the money out that he put in, is if the price of the asset can cover in full both the head creditor, then him.

The thing is though as it stood it didn't.

So he manipulated a bidding war for the asset (the hotel) in order to inflate its price and get his money back.

Nothing at all wrong in doing that - he simply wants back to money he put in.

All quite legal and above board.

That's how the business world works.

Why should he walk away from £3.5m that is his, without at least trying to get it back?

That's how the real world works - and I doubt you would walk away from £3.5m that was your money and owed to you, without some sort of a fight for it.

I certainly wouldn't.

That’s why my point was hinged around the legitimacy of his claim. Last thing I read was that the value of Ken’s claim was unconfirmed - might have missed this changing though.

It's never been unconfirmed, it is stated in the Administers report as undetermined.

The Administrator can't state how much he can pay Anderson until AFTER the hotel is sold and when he will know how much there is left in the pot to pay him after James/PBP have taken their £5.5m first claim from it.

Hi Sluffy 
Sorry if i have missed this but the latest mention of Jeff Thomas cessation from FV, is this the original movement from director to still being involved as an investor, or a new note pulling out all together ?

And was the Keith Morris involvement ever confirmed?

Yep that makes sense to me thanks. Where does the £3.5 million figure come from? I only ask because of the disputes made in terms of what the club owed KA and EDT.

wessy wrote:Hi Sluffy 
Sorry if i have missed this but the latest mention of Jeff Thomas cessation from FV, is this the original movement from director to still being involved as an investor, or a new note pulling out all together ?

And was the Keith Morris involvement ever confirmed?

Nothing on Companies House about Keith Morris (or any other new name) on Companies House so far today - but they aren't on the ball about paper work at times, so could still be being processed for all we know.

More likely though something like the following could have happened (stick with me I'll get to the point eventually).

Jeff Thomas was a joint equal owner of Football Ventures with two shares in the company - Sharon Brittan and Michael James (a minority joint owner of Prescot Business Park) also holding two shares each.

It's who owns the shares is the important bit - being a Director is not that important as such.

Thomas has quit as a Director and at the same time issued a statement that he is no longer a major shareholder in the company (he no longer owns a third of the shares).  This implies he hasn't got rid of his shares entirely - so he must be holding on to one of the two, so what as happened to the other one.

To invest money into a company you really are looking for one of two things usually, a share of the ownership of it, or to guarantee you get your money back by securing your investment against the companies assets.

As the company has got no assets yet because they have bought anything so far, it is reasonable to assume that Morris has done a deal to obtain the other share from Thomas - so that they have one each, or a sixth ownership of FV each.

That's what I think has probably happened.

Hope all that makes sense to you?

T.R.O.Y wrote:Yep that makes sense to me thanks. Where does the £3.5 million figure come from? I only ask because of the disputes made in terms of what the club owed KA and EDT.

I have mentioned it above already but Anderson secured the £5m he had loaned from Davies to pay off the BM loan, before he paid off the BM loan.

In theory he still owes £5m (plus interest) to Eddie Davies Estate/Trust.

He secured the £5m in general across all of Burnden Leisure's assets which included the club and the hotel.

The clubs Administrator determined that he had more or less £1.6m secured in the club, leaving him hoping that the remaining £3.4m would be secured on the hotel but he had two hurdles to overcome if he were to recover it though, the first is that he stood second in line to PBP's £5.5m head creditor status and the current market value of the hotel was deemed only around the £5m mark - thus him getting nothing back on the £3.4m if things stayed as they were.

As I say he is in hock to the tune of £5m to EDT and it is up to them to attempt recover the money from him if that was their intent.

So if Ken could somehow create a situation where the price to be paid for the hotel could be moved up over the £5.5m mark closer to the £9m mark, then he stood a good chance of getting 'his' money back.

It's another question entirely if he was immoral in creating such a market (if he did - no one can prove he has), or even if he did eventually get some/all of 'his' money back, he repaid the Eddie Davies loan - all this (even though it probably inflames peoples emotions) are incidental to the legality of the money being 'his' in the first place and being rather fortunate that various random folk of suddenly expressed such an interest on a hotel no one was bothered about less than two or so months ago!

Being an obnoxious hardnosed business man is not a crime - and this was the message I've been imparting for the last three years on here - with very little success whilst receiving plenty of abuse for my troubles.

Many, many people have lived in a sort of fantasy football bubble and can't seem to grasp nor understand the reality of running a club without a philanthropist owner willing to pump his own money into it as his pet hobby.  When Eddie died suddenly, there was only one way this was going to end, as there never was any billionaires lining up to buy the club as the likes of Wanderlust was utterly convinced there was because his mate down the pub told him so - as evidenced by the utter lack of interest of anyone other than the FV paupers even paying the £25k to look at the books prior to the sale.

I see that folk are already kicking off about the club asking £24 a ticket for the Coventry match!  Unfair of me to comment as I no longer go to games but they are still living in the football bubble rather than comprehending that in the real world if a club can't live within its means then sooner or later it will go under.

Have they learned nothing over the last three or four months???

Good to see the first thing the Supporters Trust does after being in hiding since they had a public denouncement of Michael James and Eddie Davies Trust - probably the real saviours of the club from extinction - is to write to complain the ticket prices for this game are too high!

How about them putting their hand in their pocket and donate say £40k towards keeping those costs down for the match until the new owners have bought the club!

They like everyone else seem to live in this unrealistic football bubble and not in the real world of trading at a loss continually WILL put you out of business eventually (unless you have an Eddie Davies to prop you up - and look what happened when he decided he'd had enough).

Sluffy wrote:I see that folk are already kicking off about the club asking £24 a ticket for the Coventry match!  Unfair of me to comment as I no longer go to games.

So will this be your final post on the subject?

Getting really sick of having to repeat this Sluffy, nobody is arguing that Ken has gone beyond the law - please stop claiming you’re fighting a solo battle against this line - nobody is arguing with you, give it up.

Thanks for the rest of the explanation though, sounds like a theory but with some good supporting facts.

Any idea how much of Ken’s own money has been invested in the club?

T.R.O.Y wrote:Getting really sick of having to repeat this Sluffy, nobody is arguing that Ken has gone beyond the law - please stop claiming you’re fighting a solo battle against this line - nobody is arguing with you, give it up.

Thanks for the rest of the explanation though, sounds like a theory but with some good supporting facts.

Any idea how much of Ken’s own money has been invested in the club?

Nobody is arguing with me ANYMORE on this point would be a more factual thing to have said - I've had three years of abuse from Wanderlust (and others) that Anderson was raping and pillaging the club for his own personal benefit.

Anyway,

Whether you or anyone else likes it his 'own money' is what the Administrators will be paying back to him, which is £1.6m secured, and £180k unsecured (at 35p in the £) by the clubs Administrator and the fully explained 'undetermined' amount.

There are also a few minor items on the club side to do with unsecured creditors in respect of Inner Circle Investments of around £60k and Athos which (iirc) is around £100k(?) both at 35p in the £.

Yes while we had you at the other end of the spectrum telling us he was a Jeff Bezos like figure with balls of steel who’d saved the club and we should all be grateful. Mistakes have been made on both sides, because we’re having to guess most of what’s going on.

Sorry to labour the point, but does that mean in your theory that the money KA put in to cover wages etc while the club was making a loss was actually the money loaned from ED?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I see that folk are already kicking off about the club asking £24 a ticket for the Coventry match!  Unfair of me to comment as I no longer go to games.

So will this be your final post on the subject?

If you want it to be.

I don't go so I don't believe myself that I don't have a right to comment overly much in respect of those that do, and pay.



I just think people would have been happy to pay an extra four quid (about the price of a pint around where I live) to see the club still alive and playing whilst awaiting the takeover, than bitch about it and not going to see the game).

Hardly shows much gratitude to those fighting hard for the clubs future, does it?

T.R.O.Y wrote:Yes while we had you at the other end of the spectrum telling us he was a Jeff Bezos like figure with balls of steel who’d saved the club and we should all be grateful. Mistakes have been made on both sides, because we’re having to guess most of what’s going on.

Sorry to labour the point, but does that mean in your theory that the money KA put in to cover wages etc while the club was making a loss was actually the money loaned from ED?

Well the facts are he did.

He negotiated a million of the BM loan, he cut the player cost by around £12m whilst getting us promoted and staying up for a season, he faced down contractors in to giving much better terms and terminated as many of the stupid over inflated contracts he inherited from Gartside.

The most notable one he couldn't deal on was Heathcote's and it is no surprise at all that one of the first things the hotel Administrator did was to terminate that contract for in effect exploiting the business financially.

He got lucky with the Madine transfer otherwise we would have been in the same position as we are a year earlier.

All whilst in effect putting as little of his own personal money into the club.

Quite an achievement in business terms for a financial basket case of a business he inherited and with a co-owner whose first action was to plunge it £5m into even further debt!

Not absolutely sure what you are asking me but the £5m loan he took out from Eddie was the £5m he secured in the club of which he will be getting £1.6m from the clubs Administrator and as yet an undetermined amount from the Hotel Administrator.

The £180k unsecured is what he paid to pay the match day staff to put a game on at the backend of last season - he stands to get back about £63k of that.

Inner Circle Investments Ltd is Ken's own business and Athos is alleged to be his son's Lee's.

He oversaw the expiration of the final contracts we had left from EDT era, hardly takes a business genius to know we weren’t able to pay them again.

My point on ‘his money’ was that he’s taken a bonus out of the club for at least one year, yet seemingly spent Eddie Davies cash otherwise. My question would be what did he do to earn his bonus during such a turbulent period.

T.R.O.Y wrote:He oversaw the expiration of the final contracts we had left from EDT era, hardly takes a business genius to know we weren’t able to pay them again.

My point on ‘his money’ was that he’s taken a bonus out of the club for at least one year, yet seemingly spent Eddie Davies cash otherwise. My question would be what did he do to earn his bonus during such a turbulent period.

He had to carry and fund those wages whilst on third tier income, whilst dealing with all the other financial catastrophise Gartside signed off on.

As far as I recall he claimed a promotion bonus in line with those he paid to players and staff.  Hardly unheard of in the football 'bubble' world.  The anti-Anderson's made a big fuss about it at the time.

Fwiw such a payment was/is legal and it was nearly two seasons later before the club ran out of money, so has/had no influence in anyway on the clubs financial collapse this year.

IMO the overriding factor in all of this is that FV or whoever cannot write a check from their own personal bank account to get rid of all this nonsense. Complete pittance in football terms. I still don't believe FV have a pot to piss in and no interest in taking us forward. Hoping to be proved wrong of course but no evidence to the contrary that I can see....step in Boohoo with some real cash.

Sluffy wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:He oversaw the expiration of the final contracts we had left from EDT era, hardly takes a business genius to know we weren’t able to pay them again.

My point on ‘his money’ was that he’s taken a bonus out of the club for at least one year, yet seemingly spent Eddie Davies cash otherwise. My question would be what did he do to earn his bonus during such a turbulent period.

He had to carry and fund those wages whilst on third tier income, whilst dealing with all the other financial catastrophise Gartside signed off on.

As far as I recall he claimed a promotion bonus in line with those he paid to players and staff.  Hardly unheard of in the football 'bubble' world.  The anti-Anderson's made a big fuss about it at the time.

Fwiw such a payment was/is legal and it was nearly two seasons later before the club ran out of money, so has/had no influence in anyway on the clubs financial collapse this year.

Yes the question was what he’d done to earn said bonus? Or his son?

T.R.O.Y wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:He oversaw the expiration of the final contracts we had left from EDT era, hardly takes a business genius to know we weren’t able to pay them again.

My point on ‘his money’ was that he’s taken a bonus out of the club for at least one year, yet seemingly spent Eddie Davies cash otherwise. My question would be what did he do to earn his bonus during such a turbulent period.

He had to carry and fund those wages whilst on third tier income, whilst dealing with all the other financial catastrophise Gartside signed off on.

As far as I recall he claimed a promotion bonus in line with those he paid to players and staff.  Hardly unheard of in the football 'bubble' world.  The anti-Anderson's made a big fuss about it at the time.

Fwiw such a payment was/is legal and it was nearly two seasons later before the club ran out of money, so has/had no influence in anyway on the clubs financial collapse this year.

Yes the question was what he’d done to earn said bonus? Or his son?

I answered the question - he claimed a bonus based on the clubs success for gaining promotion.

It was shown under the auditors report on the accounts - so nothing was hidden or underhanded as such.

That's what happens in the football bubble world.

Lee Anderson would not have received any bonus as he was never an employee, Director or owner of the club.

Sluffy wrote:

wessy wrote:Hi Sluffy 
Sorry if i have missed this but the latest mention of Jeff Thomas cessation from FV, is this the original movement from director to still being involved as an investor, or a new note pulling out all together ?

And was the Keith Morris involvement ever confirmed?

Nothing on Companies House about Keith Morris (or any other new name) on Companies House so far today - but they aren't on the ball about paper work at times, so could still be being processed for all we know.

More likely though something like the following could have happened (stick with me I'll get to the point eventually).

Jeff Thomas was a joint equal owner of Football Ventures with two shares in the company - Sharon Brittan and Michael James (a minority joint owner of Prescot Business Park) also holding two shares each.

It's who owns the shares is the important bit - being a Director is not that important as such.

Thomas has quit as a Director and at the same time issued a statement that he is no longer a major shareholder in the company (he no longer owns a third of the shares).  This implies he hasn't got rid of his shares entirely - so he must be holding on to one of the two, so what as happened to the other one.

To invest money into a company you really are looking for one of two things usually, a share of the ownership of it, or to guarantee you get your money back by securing your investment against the companies assets.

As the company has got no assets yet because they have bought anything so far, it is reasonable to assume that Morris has done a deal to obtain the other share from Thomas - so that they have one each, or a sixth ownership of FV each.

That's what I think has probably happened.

Hope all that makes sense to you?

Yes thanks that makes sense, i thought he may be an extra full addition but the split share makes sense, lets see how it pans out.