ALAN HOUGHTON'S FAN'S VIEW: Things looking up, both on and off the pitch, at Wanderers

Ten Bobsworth wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:I strongly suspect that Sharon's abrupt change in tack is connected with being reminded, by those who do watch the internet on her behalf, that there are BWFC supporters who are not purring pussycats and reminded also that Michael James was one of the Unibol Four put on trial in the Court of Terrence Rigby charged with the crime of lending money to BWFC when BWFC was in urgent or critical need of funds.

Then again she might have received legal advice to be a bit more discerning or to just button it.

The only big change I've noticed in Sharon's public behaviour is that of seemingly moving away from apparently working in partnership (the ST's claim) with the ST in putting on the Fan Zone, to there being absolutely no mention of them at all - see for instance this link for future events -

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2019/december/fanzone-returns-for-early-2020-fixtures/#.XgJtyGaUJ1Y.twitter

However I guess this could be for a variety of reasons ranging from the ST probably overstating their involvement right from the off, to legal concerns that the ST is probably no longer a constituted body because it has failed to hold AGM's and submit its accounts.

It could also be that Sharon/her regime have not liked what they have seen with dealings with them to simply waiting for them to finally hold their AGM and submit their accounts before involving them fully on all things BWFC!

Tbh, I'd be mightily surprised if the ST hold their elections before the end of January as they claim they will be doing, not least because of the timescale to actually organise such an event constitutionally.

Even when they eventually do get around to it, there is clearly not going to be any substantial change as there is deep rooted widespread mistrust of them by the vast majority of Wanderers fans.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if no one new puts up for election to the Board, no vote is held  and the current board is re-elected on the nod yet again.

I think Sharon and her team have sussed them out already though.

I really cannot say whether 'there is deep rooted widespread mistrust of them (the ST) by the vast majority of Wanderers fans'. All  I have noticed is that a large number of fans seem to have lapped up the diet of hogwash and half-baked tripe served up by the BN and the ST, the 'trial of the Unibol Four' being the most recent example of the ST's bizarre efforts.

Just my opinion but you'd have to be a bit odd to want to spend your evenings listening to any of them but we'll have to wait and see who wants to be in their gang.

There used to be a fairly clued up individual called Bill Dawson who was involved in the earlier stages with the ST but I see now that he's part of the Community Trust; a very different organisation. I expect that there are a lot of fans that don't quite know that.

There's a learning curve for Sharon and Emma to go through. I hope they are quick learners.

I'm fairly confident that there is such a widespread mistrust of them based on a number of observations, namely the sea change of public opinion on social media from when they held their first meeting to the present time.

Issues such as the credibility of several of their high profile board members such as Bridge (see Company House details) Izza (his bizarre 'nosegate' video) and Allanson (comments from his professional body) all gave rise to concern.  The distinct reluctance to give a full and open account of their £25k fund raising appeal and how it has been spent, the lack of any elections resulting in any change in its leadership - its constitution in fact being structured in such a way that it is ever unlikely to do so either!  The lack of holding AGM's and said elections, the lack of filing of accounts, etc, etc.

All these and more have resulted attendance at their public meetings falling from a full house from their first one to what 60 or so for their last.  

Iles however does retain his followers who seem to fawn on his every word but since the change in management at the paper it has become extremely noticeable that his social media behaviour has altered dramatically and he seldom if ever now posts his personal views on anything other than the footballing side of things in respect of the club!

As for Sharon and Emma, I've no doubt they are working towards their own agenda, which I speculate does include winning back the fans.  I'm sure they've worked out the ST by now as well as no doubt having met the Bolton News management and discussed their esteemed reporters behaviour during the clubs last owners tenure.  I very much doubt the same will be allowed to happen again!

Onwards and upwards.

Although there seemed to be a temporary reduction in Marc Iles anti-Anderson propaganda when Adam Lord arrived at the BN, it seemed to me that they were resumed and continued until very recently.

In my long experience, Sluffy, members of clubs only take notice of governance issues when some major scandal over club funds emerges. Mr Rigby makes great play of the 4,000 that joined the ST and quite a few became dubious or critical, but the majority?

I do think Sharon made a big mistake in cosying up to individuals (the ST leadership) who had sought to denigrate Michael James who, after Eddie Davies, had done most to provide money to keep BWFC in business. Was it necessary, helpful or considerate to her ONLY fellow director?

The present mantra is to leave it all behind as if all outstanding issues have been resolved but I cannot see that they have. Are Walker Morris content with the handling of the administration? Is it not the administrators who will be reporting on the conduct of Ken Anderson (WM's client) who seemed to comply fully with his confidentiality obligations whilst others didn't and he continued to be defamed?

If KA has been guilty of wrongdoing, there is a proper process for dealing with it. It is not trial by defamation, media or any form of witch hunt.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Although there seemed to be a temporary reduction in Marc Iles anti-Anderson propaganda when Adam Lord arrived at the BN, it seemed to me that they were resumed and continued until very recently.

In my long experience, Sluffy, members of clubs only take notice of governance issues when some major scandal over club funds emerges. Mr Rigby makes great play of the 4,000 that joined the ST and quite a few became dubious or critical, but the majority?

I do think Sharon made a big mistake in cosying up to individuals (the ST leadership) who had sought to denigrate Michael James who, after Eddie Davies, had done most to provide money to keep BWFC in business. Was it necessary, helpful or considerate to her ONLY fellow director?

The present mantra is to leave it all behind as if all outstanding issues have been resolved but I cannot see that they have. Are Walker Morris content with the handling of the administration? Is it not the administrators who will be reporting on the conduct of Ken Anderson (WM's client) who seemed to comply fully with his confidentiality obligations whilst others didn't and he continued to be defamed?

If KA has been guilty of wrongdoing, there is a proper process for dealing with it. It is not trial by defamation, media or any form of witch hunt.

Iles hasn't changed his hatred of Anderson, that is clear from just the two podcasts of his I've had the misfortune to listen to, and as they go out under the BN name (The Buff) then you are right to say he's not been fully censured on this.

However I do counter with the clear fact that Mr Esteemed did not fill the shoes of his boss Bonnar (or even his Deputy Head of Sport when David Pye was recently shown the door) and that his then constant diatribe on Twitter virtually ceased over night and has not rekindled since.

I'm sure part of the reason for the latter is that he lost all his football buddies (Wheater, Taylor, Vela, etc) who were feeding them their hatred, and his mates inside the clubs administration who were telling him theirs.

The players have moved on and the staff are happy to go along with Sharon's plan and draw a line under Anderson and consign it to the past.

As for Sharon's relationship with the ST then I guess she initially wanted to get people buying Season Tickets again (FV as you note yourself seem to be light on funds generally so far) and wanted to get as many people on board as fast as she could.

Maybe she wasn't aware of the ST's view on James and EDT and even FV themselves at the time (I guess most strangers to a football club would automatically assume its ST was there to support the future survival of its beloved team and not to torpedo the lifeboats that were trying to save it!)?

Whatever it was she now seems to have distance herself from them.

As for the ST I think their relevance will be exposed to all if they ever do hold their elections as I believe it will once again show absolutely no interest from anyone in them.  I don't thing anyone will stand for election other than the existing ST Board members, I don't believe a vote will be necessary accordingly (a vote would show how many people would be even bothered to vote which I would suggest would be very few indeed) and that the same faces will be back in charge again.

In other words a completely pointless exercise to most of us with a brain in our head, namely they represent no one but themselves and certainly not the vast number of the fans as they claim to do.

It would seem our views on these issues are somewhat different to each other, which is unusual as we have constantly been on the same track as each other on so many other issues but I do think even despite the variation between us that we are ultimately on the same path, namely that Iles/ST/Fibs no longer have the same voice or supporters than when they had Anderson in their sights.

No one wants Sharon out, so the ST has no traction to try to force the current owner to go so they can take power for themselves.  Similarly Iles has no poison to spread on Sharon or her regime so far, so he is mute.

No doubt there are many twist and turns to come yet but the tide is on Sharon's side and until it turns (if ever) Iles and the rest are beached and withering away in the Sun.

Long may it be so for them!

I don't think we are very far apart, Sluffy, but there are still things I'm sceptical about. I certainly don't want to be on Sharon or Emma's back because like Ken Andersoon before them they are taking on a bundle of problems arising out of limited funds and no effective management for months before the takeover.

I also don't want to be defending Ken Anderson if he has been guilty of offences that I'm not presently aware of. However the accusation that he was a rogue owner that pocketed a £525K fee when BWFC gained promotion from League 1 appeared in just about every national newspaper and I cannot see that it ever reached its declared destination, Inner Circle Sports and Media, and no-one seems interested in where the money did go.

Emma was asked at the Lancaster Whites meeting who paid for the Reebok stadium. She said she didn't know. She was then asked about whether FV planned to commemorate the £195m ED spent on BWFC to which she said that FV had spoken to Eddie's widow shortly after the takeover but Sue wasn't ready. But how could anyone discuss with Eddie's widow how to commemorate his contribution without first establishing exactly what his contributions had been and when?

The present funding of FV seems to be mainly money borrowed on the security of assets that Eddie paid for. Shouldn't there at least be an effort to establish/acknowledge the facts even if there's not much you can do about them? I think there should.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:I don't think we are very far apart, Sluffy, but there are still things I'm sceptical about. I certainly don't want to be on Sharon or Emma's back because like Ken Andersoon before them they are taking on a bundle of problems arising out of limited funds and no effective management for months before the takeover.

I also don't want to be defending Ken Anderson if he has been guilty of offences that I'm not presently aware of. However the accusation that he was a rogue owner that pocketed a £525K fee when BWFC gained promotion from League 1 appeared in just about every national newspaper and I cannot see that it ever reached its declared destination, Inner Circle Sports and Media, and no-one seems interested in where the money did go.

Emma was asked at the Lancaster Whites meeting who paid for the Reebok stadium. She said she didn't know. She was then asked about whether FV planned to commemorate the £195m ED spent on BWFC to which she said that FV had spoken to Eddie's widow shortly after the takeover but Sue wasn't ready. But how could anyone discuss with Eddie's widow how to commemorate his contribution without first establishing exactly what his contributions had been and when?

The present funding of FV seems to be mainly money borrowed on the security of assets that Eddie paid for. Shouldn't there at least be an effort to establish/acknowledge the facts even if there's not much you can do about them? I think there should.

Unless the administrators have looked forensically at the £525k (and other similar transactions presumably) then I think that horse has bolted never to return and the general belief that KA pocketed the money will never change, irrespective if it is actually true or not.

Similarly do new owners of the club really care much as to who put what into it before they arrived on the scene?

In reality they have bought the club as is today, and not one that one person spent a huge chunk of his personal fortune on a few years back.

Of course it is right and proper of them to tip their hat to that benefactor but they probably don't see a need to canonise him, especially when even now some/many fans still believe he never actually put so much money in, in the first place and/or he took more out than he ever put in!

I guess their view is that Bolton Wanderers Football and Athletic club paid for the stadium (or at least committed to it) and Eddies money went to that (or the later Burnden Leisure) rather than him personally paying for the Reebok.

Perhaps Eddie would have been better buying it himself and renting it to the club - but he didn't.

So maybe in FV eye's Eddie didn't buy the stadium but did put money into a company that did - which they themselves have now bought out of Administration.

They have bought the title of a building that was always owned (and thus funded) by the club, irrespective of how the club went about funding that purchase/construction - which of course was from Eddie's financial generosity to the club (and
the thanks of people like ourselves who appreciate that).

I'm sensing there is some sort of bad blood between Eddies family and FV, maybe they wonder what may happen to Eddie's legacy - perhaps even that the Reebok may not be there for years to come?

Who knows, what is certain is that Davies hugely funded the club from his own pocket and a debt of gratitude towards that magnanimous gesture hasn't been physically shown in someway or other.

I don't think any deliberate sleight is intended in anyway from FV but maybe their business plans and the wishes of Eddie's family somehow conflict on how they both would wish to celebrate Eddie's memory?

'which they themselves have now bought out of Administration'. Well that is one way of putting it.

FV have subscribed £1.75m only. The purchase was at a massive discount on deferred payments and borrowings secured on Eddie's largesse. Are Eddie's family hoping for some futile gesture? I can't say I would if I were a member of his family.

In other news the ST are telling us all about their
Wow. Can't wait.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:'which they themselves have now bought out of Administration'. Well that is one way of putting it.

FV have subscribed £1.75m only. The purchase was at a massive discount on deferred payments and borrowings secured on Eddie's largesse. Are Eddie's family hoping for some futile gesture? I can't say I would if I were a member of his family.

In other news the ST are telling us all about their
Exciting BWFCST Website Updates for the New Year
Wow. Can't wait.

I can!

Seems part of the reason they are doing it is to up date their records of their members details - which I would suggest would further add to the impossibility of them achieving their proposed elections prior to the end of January. How can you possibly hold a proper election if you are unsure where to send the ballot paper to?

By the time they've completed that task, then set a date for nominations to be received for election to the board, then print and dispatch ballot papers and set a deadline for their return is very unlikely to be achieved in just four weeks in my experience.

Of course and if you are cynical enough they could of course meet the January target if once again nobody puts up for election other than those standing down, who would then once again be re-elected unopposed without the need of an actual election and saving weeks of the due process!

I've no idea if Eddie's family are hoping for any form of gesture from FV, I doubt many not associated with them would.

As for buying the club out of Administration, well, they are whom the Administrator sold it too and at a price and payment schedule agreeable to the creditors of the company (and in compliance with the EFL's requirements).

It's hardly FV's fault if the Administrator and creditors accepted their proposed purchase arrangements that involved such large deferred payments secured on the clubs assets (which Eddie ultimately had paid for).

They could always have said no to them.

Maybe FV's proposal was the only one that worked for everybody, maybe the Administrator could have achieved a better outcome for the creditors (a greater up front payment to the secured creditors for instance, perhaps), maybe the Administrators structured the Administration process in such a way that it precluded a better outcome somehow?

The bottom line is though is that FV and their proposals were the one agreed to and that's why we are where we are now, whether we believe it is fair to everyone or not.

Sluffy wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:'which they themselves have now bought out of Administration'. Well that is one way of putting it.

FV have subscribed £1.75m only. The purchase was at a massive discount on deferred payments and borrowings secured on Eddie's largesse. Are Eddie's family hoping for some futile gesture? I can't say I would if I were a member of his family.

In other news the ST are telling us all about their
Exciting BWFCST Website Updates for the New Year
Wow. Can't wait.

I can!

Seems part of the reason they are doing it is to up date their records of their members details - which I would suggest would further add to the impossibility of them achieving their proposed elections prior to the end of January.  How can you possibly hold a proper election if you are unsure where to send the ballot paper to?

By the time they've completed that task, then set a date for nominations to be received for election to the board, then print and dispatch ballot papers and set a deadline for their return is very unlikely to be achieved in just four weeks in my experience.

Of course and if you are cynical enough they could of course meet the January target if once again nobody puts up for election other than those standing down, who would then once again be re-elected unopposed without the need of an actual election and saving weeks of the due process!

I've no idea if Eddie's family are hoping for any form of gesture from FV, I doubt many not associated with them would.

As for buying the club out of Administration, well, they are whom the Administrator sold it too and at a price and payment schedule agreeable to the creditors of the company (and in compliance with the EFL's requirements).

It's hardly FV's fault if the Administrator and creditors accepted their proposed purchase arrangements that involved such large deferred payments secured on the clubs assets (which Eddie ultimately had paid for).

They could always have said no to them.

Maybe FV's proposal was the only one that worked for everybody, maybe the Administrator could have achieved a better outcome for the creditors (a greater up front payment to the secured creditors for instance, perhaps), maybe the Administrators structured the Administration process in such a way that it precluded a better outcome somehow?

The bottom line is though is that FV and their proposals were the one agreed to and that's why we are where we are now, whether we believe it is fair to everyone or not.

I know where we are, Sluffy, and I know why we are where we are. Nobody wanted BWFC unless they could get it at a heavy discount with creditors hit hardest.

If I seem angry, I'm not but I am disillusioned that large numbers of BWFC supporters seem happy to swallow any amount of disinformation, nicey nicey photos and PR spin.

As for where we are going under FV, its unclear except the unavoidable build up of losses and debt until they come up with some presently unknown scheme.

Btw I won't be voting in the ST elections and have no desire to see Marc Iles in The Buff.

Can I wish you, your family and everyone at Nuts a Happy New Year now?

Ten Bobsworth wrote:I know where we are, Sluffy, and I know why we are where we are. Nobody wanted BWFC unless they could get it a heavy discount with creditors hit hardest.

If I seem angry, I'm not but I am disillusioned that large numbers of BWFC supporters seem happy to swallow any amount of disinformation, nicey nicey photos and PR spin.

As for where we are going under FV, its unclear except the unavoidable build up of losses and debt until they come up with some presently unknown scheme.

Btw I won't be  voting in the ST elections and have no desire to see Marc Iles in The Buff.

Can I wish you, your family and everyone at Nuts a Happy New Year now?

You can and happy, healthy and prosperous New Year to you and yours too.

I'm not sure if you believe I've been taken in with the new regime but I have clearly stated several times now that they can't trade and stay solvent on the turnover from football solely and up to now haven't let us in on their future thinking.

I still stand by my point though that ultimately EDT could have scuppered the sale to FV by voting to reject it and recover their debt in full much sooner from liquidation.

It may well have been a unpalatable thing for them to do but they held that option.

What other choices were left?

Whatever the reasons the sale did go through on the terms agreed and FV may well have got a very good deal from it but EDT knew very well what they were agreeing to, that point cannot be ignored.

I can't blame Sharon/FV attempting to make themselves popular with the fan base and current creditors such as Vince - they need money coming in to help pay the bills and delay payment of others, in order to trade as best they can until the master plan takes shape.

I don't think you are angry at all, I believe you to be a thinking man like myself who is governed by rationality and clarity of thought rather than emotions.  I do however understand your frustration with others who seem to be incapable of thinking/reasoning for themselves and rather sheep like follow the crowd blindly instead.

They say it is better to travel than to arrive and as such our journey has just left Anderson Town and has pulled in at Sharonville, being the next stop along the way.  It's not our final destination but we have to water and refresh ourselves whilst we are here.  

Many did not like Anderson Town and are thus over the moon to be here but a few of us like your good self didn't see everything being bad at our last stop nor everything being wonderful here.  

You can't tell the rest of our companions though because they simply don't want to hear.

Such is life.

Onwards and upwards for 2020 though and may it be a good one for all of us!

Happy New Year.