Administration and beyond!

I’ll take your advice and hang on for the annual accounts. Let’s hope we don’t have to wait too long this year.

BarrygoestoBolton wrote:I’ll take your advice and hang on for the annual accounts. Let’s hope we don’t have to wait too long this year.

Thanks from me too, Barry. Whatever has happened here I cannot see how a 130 year-old football club and 20 year-old hotel qualified at all for money from the Innovation Fund. The Liquidators Statement does however suggest that FV are short of brass and are kicking the creditors can down the road.

We ought to know more by close of play tomorrow.

I spoke too soon. FV seem to have played the COVID card this morning giving them until 30 June 2022 to file their 2021 accounts.

Savvy or what?  

Fleetwood Town have the same accounting date (30 June) and the same auditors as FV. The owning company is actually called Fleetwood Wanderers Ltd and they filed their 2021 accounts yesterday.

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

I really don't understand what is going on?

Sharon appears to be genuine and principled and perhaps she genuinely is but why is she here at our club which she doesn't seem to have had a previous connection to, why buy it for massively over what it was worth when there were other clubs and deals better suited to her elsewhere and closer to her home base and why is she spending money that on the face of it she probably doesn't have or can afford indefinitely?

If she did have such money then why all this apparent cloak and dagger stuff with share allotments where the paperwork was error prone, where a massive amount of equity (around £9.5m) suddenly had to be put in, where shares are reported to have been purchased at rates utterly ridiculous to the companies actual worth?

How are things still hanging together - the liquidators report states FV never missed a monthly payment to them which totaled to £1m, during lockdown, that EDT was part settled for something appearing to be £2.5m if not more, and that we spent around half a million in January on new players - whilst incurring a £3.5m loss in FV's first year of training (and with Covid effected seasons since)?

What is the plan?

Whose money is behind all this and do they want it back or is it just some sort of vanity project by someone rich enough to not worry about the money or want a return on it?

And if everything is in order - and there's no reason to suggest it isn't (other than Bob and my nagging doubts that things simply don't appear to stack up to us both) then why doesn't FV simply file documents to CH or publish the due accounts on time?  

I don't doubt they are able to easily do so if they really wanted to!

I'm mystified to what is going on but strangely not too worried because there clearly is money backing all this up somewhere (everything is being paid on time) but it doesn't seem to be FV who hold the funds and that seems to be why everything is stretched out until the last possible moment?

Who knows, maybe I'm completely misreading all of this but I doubt I am.

I can't say that I'm surprised at this latest delaying tactic, Sluffy. It has been par for the course with FV. For the last three years they have been the only show in town and it has cost them quite a bit but I do think that some new money is going to be needed before very long.

Meanwhile most supporters seem to relish gobbling up every bit of hype and flattery Sharon can muster. Sharon's interview with Cowgill's Jason Elliott was a classic. "I'm only doing this, Jason, because I like you".

Puh-lease.

Hmm. That’s disappointing. As we have three more months to wait, perhaps I’ll go back to work on the BWFC 2019 Liquidation statement.

BarrygoestoBolton wrote:Hmm. That’s disappointing. As we have three more months to wait, perhaps I’ll go back to work on the BWFC 2019 Liquidation statement.

I'll look forward to reading your views of it if you do.

It looks like the delay in filing or signing off the accounts has gone unnoticed by the BN and the ST (what's new?) but has also gone unnoticed on BWFC forums except for Nuts. I expect my good friend Gudnib would have posted it on TW if if he was still able to login but, for some unknown reason, he can't.

So what's the real reason for the delay in FV's accounts?

Fleetwood's accounts were signed off and filed on Monday. They'd lost another £2.9million and now have debts totalling £28.5million. Most of it is to group companies owned by Andy Pilley who, significantly, has provided an assurance to the auditors, Cowgills, that he is willing to provide financial support for the foreseeable future. i.e. 12 months.  

Lets see how many other clubs file by close of play today, the normal filing deadline, and how many don't.

They are a strange lot on TW Bob.

I'm banned from there, mainly because I was once asked to be a mod on that site and when I saw how they operated behind the scenes I basically told them that as far as I was concerned I was going to mod the site fairly and honestly and treat everybody equally as it was clear there were several in there who believed the sites rules did not apply to either them or their mates!

I was 'sacked' shortly after and been persona non grata ever since.

A few years ago they changed ownership of the site to the present owner DjBlu.  I contacted him to float the idea of finding a way our two sites may mutually work together in some way as he frequently visited Nuts to listen to the live match commentaries Karly kindly provides for us - at the time one of their posters (Tango Dancer) used to listen to his radio at home and type in the commentary on TW for others to read!

I thought letting DjBlu know that TW members were welcome to listen to the commentary, with no strings attached, would be welcome and beneficial to fellow Wanderers wanting to follow the games - but I assume he must have not wanted his regulars to visit other forums?

Anyway he blanked me - and from what I've read in some of his posts since - I'm glad he did!  Shame for those on his site who never got to know about Radio Nuts though...

Tango is basically the only mod on the site and he's weird, bans everybody, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if he thinks Gudnib is some sort of troll (he certainly believes that I'm one!).  It equally wouldn't surprise me either if Gudnib hasn't been banned but has fallen foul of logging in issues that frequently effect the site (although I see several regular posters seem to be able the access the site presently).

Tbh I find the site boring but each to their own, the handful of regulars they have clearly like it as it is.

There's one or two from there that regularly read Nuts so maybe one of them may be kind enough to pass on the message of Gudnib's login problem perhaps?

Hopefully one of them will.

I’m still scratching my head about some of the items in the Liquidation statement, in particular whether the unsecured creditors item of £5.5m includes the £2.5m payable to HMRC (in addition to the expenses item of £985k that appears to be payable in full) and so the total unsecured creditors amount is £1.92m.  In other words, not £5.5m less 35% of £2.5m as you have suggested. The other items is the administration expenses where I’m having difficulty in telling what is included in the future payments, although CLL’s residual £133k does appear to be. I’ll re-read and see if I can come to a conclusion. 
However, in trawling through a number of FVWL Companies House filings while doing this, I came up with an interesting fact. I did some calculations on the latest SH01 with an allotment date of 21st January, which shows the latest share price as £1. You wondered why it had been reduced. I wondered if it was some sort of holding document showing the nominal share price only. Well if you take the number of A ordinary shares of 471,434 and multiply by the previous share price of £8.48476 you come to almost exactly £4m. Coincidence?

Thanks Barry, some good digging there!

My initial thoughts -

I've looked back at the Statement of Admin Proposals, filed July 2019 and it list the unsecured creditors at that time (Appendix 5) -

Trade Creditors - £5.5m
Football creditors - £2.75m
Inner Circle - £180k
Bolton Whites Hotel - £?
Matchday staff - £57k
HMRC PAYE/NI - £2.25m
HMRC - VAT - £217k

So it looks likely HMRC were owed around £2.5m.

Looking now at the liquidators report it talks about (at p14 of 27) an unsecured loan of £2,562,777 (which I'm guessing is HMRC's claim) payable at 35p in the £ equating to £896, 972 and payable in 6 instalments over 3 years.

Where I've gone wrong is that I had assumed this element to be a part of the £5.5m unsecured creditors total but I now realise the £5.5m relates specifically to 'Trade Creditors' only.

So you are right, the payment to HMRC is separate from the payment of £5.5m at 35p in the £ - which does total more or less to £1.92m as you say.


As for the Administrators fees they were not clear to me either.  

The way I've read them is that there are in effect two lots of fees running somewhat in parallel, the original being fees for Administration services (which at the time of the report we are reading were still not settled in full) and fees for Liquidation, which although have started to accrue have at that time not had an initial payment on them.

I read the report to say that they had drawn more money from FV in relation to the Admin fees than they should have done but will offset the amount (£130k or something like that iirc) from the Liquidation fees.

As for the SH01 I admit to being well and truly lost on them!

I can't understand why there was the £6 and £8 share values and who got what at what price and who or what now seems to have bought a further £4m of them if what you've found is indeed correct in respect of the 21st January allotment.

You might well be correct that they were indeed issued at £8.48476 but why not simply show that on the form as has been shown on the previous SHO1???

I don't know well enough the criteria for completion of such forms, maybe it is permissible to file a 'holding' statement but to my mind I fail to see the point of such if someone has parted with £4m from their bank account and it has been received in to the bank account (presumably?) of  Football Ventures (Whites) Ltd (or to the Stock Market or wherever it is that is responsible for overseeing issuing and allocations of shares).

Why type in shares at £1 when you could just as easily type in shares at £8.48476???

I guess there must be a reason behind doing so?


Finally and fwiw I suspected for quite a while the FV may have taken advantage of other Covid loans that may well have required matched funding - mainly based on why had suddenly all these loans that were on the books suddenly turned into equity (to match and access other government loans perhaps?).

Up to now FF is clearly only showing shares equivalent to the initial loan (which looks as though it probably is at £2.5m as you originally suggested) maybe if the latest allocation is for a further £4m then perhaps it is a second FF loan converted to shares???

The obvious problem with my little scenario though is it would then breach the EFL's 10% share ownership threshold - so it probably isn't a second loan to equity from them after all!

Tbh, as much as I enjoy trying to crack puzzles like these I don't think I can (you and Bob might though!) until I've got more to go on, and the next chance for that will be the 3 month delayed accounts.

I'd be delighted to follow your progress though and I hope you to manage to get closer to what is happening than I have so far!

You've certainly been on the ball much more than me so far - I do hope you keep going too!

Thanks Barry and Sluffy. I've delayed my second and third reading of the latest Administrators statement and deferred any further consideration of the unusual share transactions in the hope that we might have some audited accounts to look at. Sadly that's not now going to happen soon.

When accounts are not completed on time its occasionally because of neglect or inefficiency but more often, in larger enterprises like football clubs, the consequence of significant financial issues relating to the accounts.

All clubs in League 1 this season to date have met their expected deadlines except for Charlton which is presently overdue by only two days and five clubs that appear to have played the COVID card giving them another three months to get sorted. The five are Morecambe, Wimbledon, Ipswich, Rotherham and Bolton.

The majority of clubs have June year ends but two clubs, with July year ends, still have until the end of this month to file.

What's the problem at Bolton? FV aren't going to tell Joe Public until they have to, are they?

Pleased to see that Rotherham filed their 2021 accounts this morning. Not many latecomers left in League 1.

Charlton filed their accounts this morning. It just reminds me of the Grand National with a few stragglers not making it to the finishing post yet.

Anyone thinking that FV could fund a sustainable Championship Club could do worse than have a gander at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Swissmeister's been looking at t'Rovers recently including the spending of other Championship clubs.

Out of FV's league if you ask me. I still don't know how FV are going to fund the next twelve month's commitments in League 1 and I'm not sure that FV do either at present.

I’d just remind you of what Sharon said in her interview with Cowgills last December:

“ If it is a three-year journey, it is a three-year journey, if it five, it is five. I have said from day one as long as I am enjoying it and my family are not affected in any way, I’d continue, and I have thoroughly enjoyed it.”


Of course, we don’t know exactly what “… the journey …” consists of, but I might suggest it means ‘getting into the Championship’. Maybe that’s when FV intend to bow out. It certainly would be a big step up in investment to even maintain a club there given they pretty much all lose money, and lots of it.

BarrygoestoBolton wrote:I’d just remind you of what Sharon said in her interview with Cowgills last December:

“ If it is a three-year journey, it is a three-year journey, if it five, it is five. I have said from day one as long as I am enjoying it and my family are not affected in any way, I’d continue, and I have thoroughly enjoyed it.”


Of course, we don’t know exactly what “… the journey …” consists of, but I might suggest it means ‘getting into the Championship’. Maybe that’s when FV intend to bow out. It certainly would be a big step up in investment to even maintain a club there given they pretty much all lose money, and lots of it.

I think there's more to it than that Barry.

There must be the wherewithal to fund the journey for however long it takes to get wherever Sharon intends to get too (as long as she continues to enjoy it and her family isn't affected by it presumably).

If money is no object then great, if money is a constraint then not so great.

Bob can't see where the money is coming from - the company certainly isn't generating it, there is a question as to how rich Sharon really is and how much from her own purse she is prepared to lose and Luckock is a complete unknown - whose money is he putting into the pot - his own or is he investing it for others (if so is BWFC and good investment - I doubt it???).

Another thing Sharon said at the interview was about the 'five' investors - who are they?

One assumes Sharon, James and Luckock are three who are the other two?

Prescot Business Park and Brett Warburton perhaps - but aren't they more creditors rather than investors??? Aren't both waiting to take their money out at the earliest opportunity?

And if there's nothing to hide, then why is everything delayed to the last possible minute in reporting things to Companies House and delayed accounts for a further three months.

Something doesn't ring true to me somehow?

We could have anything from a mystery multi-million pound backer behind all this (Mr Pink Floyd drummer) to being very much up the financial creek without a paddle (millions of pounds of loans having to be turned into equity) - we've simply no idea.

I'm more of a 'better to travel hopefully than to arrive' sort of person, I think Bob is more of wanting to know there's enough petrol in the tank to get us there before we set off!

I don't know enough about you yet Barry to hazard a guess as to how you view things!

BarrygoestoBolton wrote:I’d just remind you of what Sharon said in her interview with Cowgills last December:

“ If it is a three-year journey, it is a three-year journey, if it five, it is five. I have said from day one as long as I am enjoying it and my family are not affected in any way, I’d continue, and I have thoroughly enjoyed it.”


Of course, we don’t know exactly what “… the journey …” consists of, but I might suggest it means ‘getting into the Championship’. Maybe that’s when FV intend to bow out. It certainly would be a big step up in investment to even maintain a club there given they pretty much all lose money, and lots of it.

I think you'll find that the Cowgill interview was a PR job, Barry. Sharon's accomplished at that sort of thing. Its possibly her biggest strength.

Trying to get to the Championship before selling could be a reasonable strategy if you could afford to fund the journey and get your money back later. But how many years did Eddie Davies and Ken Anderson respectively spend trying to sell a Championship club yet failing miserably. Eddie possibly spent much of the last five years in the Premiership trying to sell it, only to meet up with a succession of tyre  kickers and charlatans from all parts of the compass.

As for Sharon's three or five-year journey, aren't Wigan showing that it doesn't take that long if you have the funding and appoint a capable manager? Mind you, I'm not sure that we know much about the Bahrainis except that they come from Bahrain, allegedly.

But if you were a wealthy Arab or Yank with money to burn, why would you prefer Wigan or Wycombe, Cambridge, Ipswich or Portsmouth to Bolton Wanderers? They all seem to have done.

Your last paragraph poses an interesting question. 
Of the clubs you’ve mentioned only ourselves and Wigan went into (recent) administration and Wigan’s happened after ours. Depending on the price, it must be more attractive to buy a club that didn’t enter administration given the restrictions and deduction of points. I really don’t know why someone would prefer to buy Wigan rather than us - we have a far superior ground, much stronger support etc. - but we weren’t available to purchase when they did.  
I suppose Ipswich and Portsmouth are both pretty desirable (although not necessarily any more than us). Again, I don’t know why someone would pick Cambridge or Wycombe, despite Wycombe’s recent, albeit brief, visit to the Championship.
Surely it must be easier to sell a club that’s on the way up than one that’s on the way down and heavily indebted. Of course, we need to wait for the annual accounts to see if there’s any debt and to get a fuller picture of the outstanding administration items, but if, at the end of next season, we’ve been promoted and have a clean balance sheet, I could see someone coming in for us at a decent price if Sharon wanted to sell.  Now whether that would give Sharon and the investors a profit is another question!

When push comes to shove, Barry, its usually money that does the talking. Heaven knows how many approaches BWFC had before and after being placed into administration but they all walked away except for FV and, before that, the two quids worth 'Sports Shield consortium'.

FV took on commitments which at the time were going to cost them an estimated £29million plus future losses. They lost more than £3 million in the first year and seem quite likely to have lost money in years two and three. FV aren't saying how much or what size of debt remains but we do know that it must be substantial but have virtually no idea where the money will come from to fund it.

Pompey's a club of a similar size to us. They reported losses  of £3.9million (EBITDA £2.1million) in 2020/21 but Pompey's owner is a billionaire, or so they say, and their auditors have been able to sign off the accounts based on directors assurances.