Wigan in Administration

Hip Priest wrote:Come on Sluff, you're not Custer, and just because 50p concurs with your view of events doesn't mean that your version of events is the last bastion of truth on this subject. As many other posters have reminded you, nobody knows the real truth here, and everybody has their own opinions and interpretations of what went on.
I agree with you that Holdsworth seems to have come out of this whole thing smelling of roses but nobody will convince me that Anderson wasn't just in it to make a fast easy buck and didn't give a rat's arse about the effect it had on Bolton Wanderers F.C.

If you think I agree with everything Sluffy says, you've not got your thinking head on.

Some things I do, some I don't. 

The amount Holdsworth walked off with is one of them. 

The amount Anderson would have earned if he got BWFC out of the brown stuff is another.

And the whole reasoning of why, with his back to the wall, Eddie came up with an inventive scheme that would give the club, its employees and its creditors the chance of avoiding the consequences of administration or liquidation in March 2016, is a third.

But any idea that Ken Anderson ever agreed or had any obligation  to spend whatever money he had on keeping BWFC afloat is just plain bonkers.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:

Hip Priest wrote:Come on Sluff, you're not Custer, and just because 50p concurs with your view of events doesn't mean that your version of events is the last bastion of truth on this subject. As many other posters have reminded you, nobody knows the real truth here, and everybody has their own opinions and interpretations of what went on.
I agree with you that Holdsworth seems to have come out of this whole thing smelling of roses but nobody will convince me that Anderson wasn't just in it to make a fast easy buck and didn't give a rat's arse about the effect it had on Bolton Wanderers F.C.

If you think I agree with everything Sluffy says, you've not got your thinking head on.

Some things I do, some I don't. 

The amount Holdsworth walked off with is one of them. 

The amount Anderson would have earned if he got BWFC out of the brown stuff is another.

And the whole reasoning of why, with his back to the wall, Eddie came up with an inventive scheme that would give the club, its employees and its creditors the chance of avoiding the consequences of administration or liquidation in March 2016, is a third.

But any idea that Ken Anderson ever agreed or had any obligation  to spend whatever money he had on keeping BWFC afloat is just plain bonkers.

Thanks Bob.

Just to straighten the record a little bit though -

I've never said how much Holdsworth walked off with.  We do know some factual things such as Ken initially buying into SSBWFC and that Holdsworth was the highest paid officer of the club for a period but I've never claimed he pocketed £1m from BM, just that KA had claimed such, however from the first two alone he got iirc £400k and say £100k wages, so that's half a million out for just 50p in for a start.

Again I've no idea what KA would have got if he managed to pull of the unmanageable with a sale instead of him going into Administration, of which of course he didn't.  The way he did do it though meant that he walked away without having to settle the £5m personal loan against him from Eddie, whilst staying marginally the right side of the law.  So he could have done the moralistic thing that TROY, BTID, Hip Priest and the rest hate him for and STILL had to pay EDT £5m (plus interest) or be a bastard and not be the gentleman about things and thus save himself £5m - legally (but certainly not morally)

How many of those who hate Anderson would do exactly the same themselves to save them from repaying a £5m debt?

All of them?

I probably would myself I'm ashamed to say.

And as for Eddie's masterplan involving penniless Holdsworth I never gave an answer, as I couldn't square the circle and still can't.

If there was to be a 'genuine' bid involving Holdsworth he would have to have a backer first, in order for them to provide assets against the loan from BM. I reasoned that couldn't be the case because it was known before the event that Gordon would step away on the court date and that Eddie would allow security on the BM loan on BWFC assets in advance of this.  So Eddie had to be integral to what then flowed from this.

Bob seems to steer me along a path where the plan was to let Eddie hand over the club to someone who he trusts and thus allow him to walk away from it. But who is going to settle the BM loan when it falls due? Not Holdsworth, the only assets he had was 50% (or as near as damn it) of the club ownership shares and we already know from his sale of a 15% of the total club holding for £400k  that IT would have amounted to something like a value of £1.5m originally and after selling the chunk to KA leaving Dean about £1.1m or so left.

I don't suppose Holdsworth is the brightest but even he most have known he had to have some sort of a safety net behind him to pay the money back (which became due just 10 days after he and Anderson bought the club) so who was his safety net - not Anderson for sure, so it can only be Davies but Davies did all this so he could step away from Bolton yet by brining Holdsworth in and guaranteeing the loan against the club meant he couldn't?

The only way that plan could have worked was for Anderson to give Holdsworth £5m for his half of the club shares and they simply were not worth that much were they?

If Holdsworth isn't paid up and walks off into the sunset at the start then he's going to own 50% of the club from day one but have no financial input (or business skills to turn it around) whilst Anderson presumably is expected to put both his money in and turn the club around on his own and only receive half the money when he's done so - that's never going to be acceptable to him or anyone else is it?

So clearly, at least to me, something doesn't add up here and I fail to see how what happen in the structuring of events leading to the sale to Holdsworth was ever going to allow Eddie to walk away if that was the object of the whole thing?

I do agree on your final point though!!!

Hip Priest wrote:Come on Sluff, you're not Custer, and just because 50p concurs with your view of events doesn't mean that your version of events is the last bastion of truth on this subject. As many other posters have reminded you, nobody knows the real truth here, and everybody has their own opinions and interpretations of what went on.
I agree with you that Holdsworth seems to have come out of this whole thing smelling of roses but nobody will convince me that Anderson wasn't just in it to make a fast easy buck and didn't give a rat's arse about the effect it had on Bolton Wanderers F.C.

I'm not absolutely sure what you are saying to me here, sorry.

You're free to believe whatever ever you like and yes Anderson doesn't do voluntary work and was certainly here to earn himself a decent return for his time and energy - wouldn't you, wouldn't everybody?  I know I would.

He would have had some considerable concern about the effect he had on Bolton Wanderers FC, not least he would have had his eye on the £6m difference or so for being in the Championship to being in the third tier but his prime aim was about saving the business by turning it around financially and making money for himself doing so (as opposed to putting his OWN wealth into the club like Eddie did).

I'm not Custer, that is true - is that a reference I made about me being the cavalry sometime back which I only really made in jest anyway, otherwise I don't know what you are talking about?  Also I take it you mean Bob is 50p and if so - and as he has already said for himself above - he doesn't concur with a chunks of what I've previously posted.  I do think however that he and I are generally both heading in the same direction though.

The bottom line is that whatever you think of Holdsworth and Anderson they were the bridge from Eddie to FV and that is where we are now.

Sluffy,  its not that complicated. Eddie had drawn the line in 2014 not 2015 as you seem to have claimed. And it most certainly was not the case of turning off a tap without notice as you have implied.  

ED hadn't been a director of BL or BWFC for years and had paid off all the bank debt in 2009 putting the club into a more saleable position. And though he'd had a multitude of 'interested parties' he didn't trust any of them.

He wanted to pass it on as a Premier League club but that was scuppered by relegation on the last day of the 2011/12 season. He wanted to get back into the Premiership. That didn't work. Even worse, the prospect of relegation from the Championship loomed.

All the while the board, through Phil Gartside, kept going back to Eddie time after time for more money. He drew the line in 2014, from then on the board had to manage as best they could.

But they couldn't manage because its impossible to run a Championship club without a Sugar Daddy and so they had to hope that Mr Moneybags would eventually turn up. He didn't. Holdsworth turned up  and he wasn't Mr Moneybags. Eventually Ken Anderson arrived on the scene. He wasn't Mr Moneybags either but he was a very experienced and capable insolvency expert. 

So Eddie assisted the handover by allowing Blumarble to have security for their loan and privately agreeing to provide up to £2.5m, if needed, to help what was going to be an exceedingly difficult challenge.

But that £2.5m would not go directly to the club, it would go to the new owners. They weren't putting in any money of their own but if they spent any of Eddie's money they'd be personally liable to repay Eddie.

Would Dean Holdsworth be good for the money? Would he take that risk? I would doubt it on both counts.
What about Ken Anderson? He might if it helped him realise a profit but would he do it if Holdsworth was going to take half the profit? No chance is the answer.

As for Eddie borrowing money from Blumarble then reneging on the deal days later, I think you are barking up the wrong tree entirely. But its  entirely possible that Blumarble thought that, if push came to shove, Eddie would come to the rescue as he'd done so many times before. And, of course, he did but it was after two and a half  years of pushing and shoving.

Thank you Bob, I appreciate your views.

However I've no idea how you've interpreted several things of what I've previously posted, I can only imagine I've not been clear in how I've written some of the stuff, if so I apologise to you and anyone else misunderstanding what I've wrote so please allow me to attempt to rectify that below.

I've never said or even implied Eddie should have taken on the loan from BM , let alone not settle it 10 days after the club was taken over???  

What I have been attempting to say was instead of Holdsworth taking on the loan and in so doing become integral to the whole thing (and that as you freely admit was a major problem to anyone else involved- because he had no money and had taken on a £5m debt with with no money as such personally to his name, put into his company he had just set up for a quid  (Sports Shield Investments) and no means of paying it off?) then why didn't the club (not Eddie personally!!!) - Bolton Wanderers FC - which Eddie owned prior to the sale - take out a loan against their remaining assets directly with a loan company (it needed not have been BM) and have the same assets secured against by them and achieve exactly the SAME THING without having Holdsworth involvement in any way, shape or form???

It would have taken Holdsworth out of the picture entirely, not effect Anderson in anyway other to benefit him by not being saddled with a joint owner of the company he was taking on and who could add nothing to the running of it either financially or from his non existent business acumen?

There was absolutely no need for Holdsworth's involvement at all, other than maybe a deflection as such leading up to the sale with all eyes on him and Gordon and non at all on Ken Anderson?

It could have been sold to the fans that the Holdsworth deal collapsed at the very last minute but Anderson stepped in, saved the day and stopped it falling in to Administration by becoming the new sole owner.

In short I can't understand any logic for Holdsworth to be there at all let alone become joint owner!!!

As for Eddie 'turning off the taps'.

I've always said it had been 'known' that for some years prior to the eventual sale that the club was available for purchase and that Eddie wanted to step back from it.

I'd read somewhere (maybe even something you had said) that he had given the club notice that he intended to stop funding it some 18 months before, which would place that to be in 2014, so it all seems to fit - I don't have any problem with any of that.

What I can't understand and which seems to undermine this intention is the action of the club KNOWING and being fully aware of what was about to happen???

For example on the 10th December, 2015 the club made an this official statement saying that the club failed to pay its monthly tax bill to HMRC for November -

Update from Bolton Wanderers regarding the club's current HMRC situation

Bolton Wanderers can confirm that the club has now received a winding up petition from HMRC in respect of unpaid PAYE and VAT for the month of November.

Despite requests from the club to HMRC to give it further time to either conclude a sale or raise additional funds, HMRC has proceeded with due process and duly served a petition.  

Trevor Birch, advisor to the board and owner at Bolton Wanderers, said: “Quite clearly the club remains in a critical financial position. We will continue to try and finalise a sale or alternatively raise some short term funds needed to give the club a breathing space and time in which to consider its options.”

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2015/december/club-statement/

So if it could not pay the taxman in November how then could it seem to think it could afford the signing of a player (Ben Amos) on a FOUR YEAR deal at £16k per week, in July 2015, just a matter of some four months earlier???

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2015/july/ben-amos-completes-bolton-wanderers-move/

Fwiw this was attributed to Iles in November -

According to friend of the site Marc Iles, short term funding options are said to involve the sale of the hotel and offices at the Macron Stadium.

https://lionofviennasuite.sbnation.com/2015/12/10/9885774/bolton-wanderers-formally-issued-with-winding-up-petition-from-hmrc

PBP went on to secure against the hotel on 29th January, 2016, with the infamous BM loan secured as well on the club sale on 17th March, 2016.

So £10m worth of loans needed to be put into the club within a matter of months after signing a player to a FOUR YEAR deal at £16k per week???

It certainly doesn't sound like a business that had had a 18 months notice to get itself ready for the withdrawal of its principle financial benefactor does it?

I'm not saying Eddie didn't give notice and maybe the financial mess was down to Phil Gartside illness but never the less Eddie MUST have known that the financial position the club was in meant he either stuck to his guns, turn off the taps and walk away and let the club take its chances OR keep involved in someway and prop it up from his own wealth.

He didn't turn his back and walk away - we know that so why then did he get Holdsworth tied up in becoming joint owner of the club and takeout the BM loan and pay it to Sports Shield Investment - when he as Bolton Wanderers FC could have done exactly the same with Holdsworth's involvement at all???

Another thing I've pondered on but never mentioned before because I'm not knowledgeable about such facts is how much was actually borrowed from BM?

We know BM had security on BWFC for £5m and that only £4m was received by the club.

An explanation between the two amounts is the £4m was borrowed but £5m secured in case of default and to cover accruing interest charges.

However I have noted that when the Administrators settled the charges on assets to allow the club and hotel to be sold they paid out the secured sum PLUS additional interest.

For example PBP secured £5m on the hotel but the settlement amount from the Administrator was £6,482,425 (p10 of 28 of the Administrators Progress Report, 12th December, 2019).

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03674979/filing-history

It would seem to me on that basis therefore that the BM loan WAS for £5m handed over to Holdsworth's SSI - although I can't find any mention of it on the company's accounts - for the year ending 31st July, 2016.

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09712490/filing-history

Maybe there is stuff I'm not aware of but on the face of it and compared to what the Admin (appointed by Ken Anderson remember) paid to PBP it does tend to suggest that £1m does seem not to be fully explained as to what happened to it?


Anyway the bottom line to ALL of this is that whatever did happen, happened.

Holdsworth was involved, his company took out the BM loan and put £4m into the club (secured on £5m of assets), Anderson had to sort the mess out and Eddie did not walkaway from the club as he might of planned but put millions more into it leading up to his untimely death.

Anything happening at Wigan though?

wanderlust wrote:Anything happening at Wigan though?

Yes, lots.

Thanks for asking.

wanderlust wrote:Anything happening at Wigan though?

They might be taken over by someone who knows how to slice and dice his onions.
The main conversation should be somewhere else but its here so you might as well live with it.
But as you claim to be a bit of a whizz on finance, why not pop over onto the Vince Watch thread and give us all the benefit of your  wisdom, expertise and insight.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
They might be taken over by someone who knows how to slice and dice his onions.
The main conversation should be somewhere else but its here so you might as well live with it.
But as you claim to be a bit of a whizz on finance, why not pop over onto the Vince Watch thread and give us all the benefit of your  wisdom, expertise and insight.

Nice of you to ask. Pointless having a conversation based on declared losses though isn't it?
Meaningless as Trump's tax advisors will tell you.

The Amos situation is interesting, Sluffy, but it is a bit of a diversion.

Presumably the person who signed it off was persuaded that Amos was worth the money and could be sold on at a profit as Madine subsequently was. It was poor judgement and may well have taken place when Phil Gartside was very ill.

Its not hard to imagine how frustrating Ken Anderson must have found it having to pay out unaffordable amounts to players whilst being under pressure to pay long overdue suppliers with money he didn't have. If Amos wouldn't compromise and he wouldn't, the best thing was to get him out to another club on loan and at least try to get some contribution to his wages. That's what he did.

But the position the board faced in 2015 was that, without someone to replace Eddie's funding, they were staring into the abyss. Battening down the hatches wasn't an option. Wage costs had been reduced by a third but the club could still not have paid its way if all its players played for free.

Eddie would do what he could to help a takeover but he was not making any kind of comeback. You must try to understand that.

wanderlust wrote:
Nice of you to ask. Pointless having a conversation based on declared losses though isn't it?
Meaningless as Trump's tax advisors will tell you.

Nothing to do with Trump. Anybody with a decent understanding of finance should be able to take a quick look at the Vince situation and make some intelligent observations. And because Vince threatened to put BWFC into liquidation, it shouldn't be too much trouble.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:The Amos situation is interesting, Sluffy, but it is a bit of a diversion.

Presumably the person who signed it off was persuaded that Amos was worth the money and could be sold on at a profit as Madine subsequently was. It was poor judgement and may well have taken place when Phil Gartside was very ill.

Its not hard to imagine how frustrating Ken Anderson must have found it having to pay out unaffordable amounts to players whilst being under pressure to pay long overdue suppliers with money he didn't have. If Amos wouldn't compromise and he wouldn't, the best thing was to get him out to another club on loan and at least try to get some contribution to his wages. That's what he did.

But the position the board faced in 2015 was that, without someone to replace Eddie's funding, they were staring into the abyss. Battening down the hatches wasn't an option. Wage costs had been reduced by a third but the club could still not have paid its way if all its players played for free.

Eddie would do what he could to help a takeover but he was not making any kind of comeback. You must try to understand that.

Yes I accept/understand/believe or any other word that best fits, that Eddie wanted out of the game.

I don't even wish to make an issue of it as such - although I've clearly written a lot on it but that's simply because I can't understand the plan he had to do that?

It's more me puzzling over something than wanting to make a big issue out of it.

As I've said a few times I simply can not square the circle from what was intended (Eddie stepping away) to what went on to happen (Eddie still very much involved because his money was still needed and he didn't say no, sorry, no more of it!).

I'm also more than a bit sceptical that a player signed for free would appreciate in value in the transfer market to any great degree by the next available transfer window some six months later when the club must have already forecast that it could not go even four months further from the day he was signed before they ran out of money to pay HMRC!  

Indeed the club had to take on loans of £10m just to get through to the following summers transfer window and even coveted goal scores such as Madine were only bringing £6m  when keepers were always considered to be of significantly less value to a team.

As I keep saying, such things are just little puzzles for me to play with, my aim isn't to discredit or undermine anyone, simply to try and fathom out for myself what was going on.

No harm or disrespect intended to anyone ever, from me at least.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
Nothing to do with Trump. Anybody with a decent understanding of finance should be able to take a quick look at the Vince situation and make some intelligent observations. And because Vince threatened to put BWFC into liquidation, it shouldn't be too much trouble.

Anyone with a decent understanding of business finance would recognise that tax dodger Trump was an analogy describing the value of declared P & L in assessing what is really going on in the business i.e. not much when so many other factors are at play.

Sluffy wrote:

Yes I accept/understand/believe or any other word that best fits, that Eddie wanted out of the game.

I don't even wish to make an issue of it as such - although I've clearly written a lot on it but that's simply because I can't understand the plan he had to do that?

It's more me puzzling over something than wanting to make a big issue out of it.

As I've said a few times I simply can not square the circle from what was intended (Eddie stepping away) to what went on to happen (Eddie still very much involved because his money was still needed and he didn't say no, sorry, no more of it!).

I'm also more than a bit sceptical that a player signed for free would appreciate in value in the transfer market to any great degree by the next available transfer window some six months later when the club must have already forecast that it could not go even four months further from the day he was signed before they ran out of money to pay HMRC!  

Indeed the club had to take on loans of £10m just to get through to the following summers transfer window and even coveted goal scores such as Madine were only bringing £6m  when keepers were always considered to be of significantly less value to a team.

As I keep saying, such things are just little puzzles for me to play with, my aim isn't to discredit or undermine anyone, simply to try and fathom out for myself what was going on.

No harm or disrespect intended to anyone ever, from me at least.

No disrespect intended ever of you from me, Sluffy, but I cannot say that I respect the blind and malicious prejudice that has been prevalent in the reporting of the financial affairs of Bolton Wanderers for many a year or the abominable hostility it helped spawn.

I'm confident that Eddie did 'the right thing' in March 2016 and have no difficulty in understanding his reasoning. It was never going to be plain sailing and there was always going to be one top dog in the quasi partnership that took over. They'd have to sort that out between themselves but you are quite correct in saying that it provided the bridge to the ownership the club has now and it kept devoted employees of Bolton Wanderers in their jobs much longer than would otherwise have been the case.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:No disrespect intended ever of you from me, Sluffy, but I cannot say that I respect the blind and malicious prejudice that has been prevalent in the reporting of the financial affairs of Bolton Wanderers for many a year or the abominable hostility it helped spawn.

I'm confident that Eddie did 'the right thing' in March 2016 and have no difficulty in understanding his reasoning. It was never going to be plain sailing and there was always going to be one top dog in the quasi partnership that took over. They'd have to sort that out between themselves but you are quite correct in saying that it provided the bridge to the ownership the club has now and it kept devoted employees of Bolton Wanderers in their jobs much longer than would otherwise have been the case.

Thanks Bob, I've known from your kindness in helping me over the last year or two that you've always given me respect even when at times we diverged in our views but we both have been of the same mind that key 'influencers' (as the say in social media speak) such as Iles/Bonnar and the ST have stirred the pot for their own reasons a brewed a powerful toxicity at times that was more towards their own agendas than what was the true case of events - and many/virtually all, bought into it in some degree or other - herd mentality - follow the sheppard (Marc Iles) sort of thing I suppose.

Any way all the key players have gone, Iles is still here but has had his wings clipped and he's just seen the former office boy, who no doubt he used to get him to make him a cuppa and wash his cup afterwards for him, become his new editor!

I don't know if Iles thinks about things but I know if it was me who had basically been in the same job for the last 17 years and just seen the office boy rise to the top job whilst I'd basically stagnated in all that time, I'd be evaluating if I'd gone badly wrong somewhere along the line?

Anyway back to the original thread -

EXCLUSIVE – Wigan’s mystery Spanish takeover is being fronted by former advertising chief Andy Clilverd.

Clilverd is the owner of Signature Sport* who have been looking for a football club to buy for the past three years.

The Bristol-based businessmen has previous experience working in marketing and on the Rugby World Cup but running Wigan would be the biggest task of his career.

Clilverd was at Wigan’s ground yesterday (Monday) as he finalised the deal to be put to the administrators and the details demanded by the EFL.

The identity of the ‘money man’ in Spain has yet to be confirmed but sources reveal it is former Albacete owner Jesus Garrido Cristo.

Clilverd found a previous buyer for Wigan two years ago before they were taken over by the Hong Kong group who eventually left them in administration.

However at the time Clilverd brought Leganes owner Felipe Moreno to the table but that deal did not progress.

Clilverd advertises his services by saying he Is looking to match his backer with ‘a League One or Two club looking for a prudent investor.’**

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/6118601/transfer-news-live-benrahma-west-ham-messi-suarez-barcelona/

* Signature Sport is owned by him and his wife and had up to 28th Feb, 2019 assets of £5k and liabilities of £23k

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/10596366/filing-history

Hardly a success it seems?

** Director
Signature Sport
Feb 2017 - Present 3 years 9 months

I am currently working with an experienced football investor who is looking for opportunities in EFL Leagues 1 and 2; it would be their first foray into the UK. They have a very good track record in Europe and their strategy is financially prudent and sustainable. If you are looking for sound investment, please contact me, if you are after a 'sugar daddy' don't bother.
andy@signaturesport.co.uk

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/andy-clilverd-87107413

Fwiw this is an article that was published as recently as March this year - hardly reads as though he's going to be a big player in a take over does it??

More like a Dean Holdsworth I suspect!

Link to article -

Grassroots sport in the current climate

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/grassroots-sport-current-climate-andy-clilverd?articleId=6646750613852033025#comments-6646750613852033025&trk=public_profile_article_view

I'd wager Lazlo Hamer had a more impressive CV and balance sheet. Remember him, Sluffy? He used to sell burgers and hotdogs outside Burnden Park and a few other select venues around the borough.

I don't know the name but I seem to remember burger sellers outside the ground, but I didn't use them myself so wouldn't know his name or recognise him at other locations around the town but from the little bit I seemed to have gleamed on Clilverd he could possibly be in the same wealth bracket as Mr Hamer though.

Sluffy wrote:I don't know the name but I seem to remember burger sellers outside the ground, but I didn't use them myself so wouldn't know his name or recognise him at other locations around the town but from the little bit I seemed to have gleamed on Clilverd he could possibly be in the same wealth bracket as Mr Hamer though.

Quite well-known around the borough was Lazlo but there do seem to be one or two Clilverd types around footie clubs.

Had a quiet chuckle to myself when I read:

‘a League One or Two club looking for a prudent investor.’


Reminded me of a couple of lines from a Five Penny Piece song:


Without a doubt, they'll tell you owt
But they must think that we know nowt


Five Penny Piece was a Lancashire folk group. A bit like the Houghton Weavers, but with a nice thread of humour running through their songs.

Yes I remember the Five Penny Piece, I used to like stuff like this, Bernard Wriggly, The Spinners, Mike Harding and the Weavers and a little bit later Hovis Presley.

Thought you might like this one of Hovis if you haven't heard it before -

Thanks Sluffy. I don't remember Hovis Presley but I like the name. I'll listen to it later.

You'll probably remember that it was when Tony Berry died that Rammy announced his sad prognosis on Nuts. Rammy had been at Thornleigh with Tony.

The Houghton Weavers, Norman Prince, also went to Thornleigh and, though the group wasn't formed until 1975, Norman used to be part of a group that played at the Cattle Market pub in Bolton quite a few years before that. I think there was another member of that group that joined with Norman to form the Westhoughton Weavers in 1975. It might have been Tony but I'm not sure.