Latest BWFC Accounts - Year ended 30th June, 2020

Ten Bobsworth wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Ah ok, thanks Bob.

Just underlines that I lack the knowledge or expertise to look too deeply into accounts and appreciate your understanding and sharing of them with us all.

There aren't many that can figure it all out, Sluffy and there aren't many that want to know the facts or the truth. That's been the case for years and it's never changed much at all.

We also don't actually know whether this £10million 'intellectual property' attaches to the hotel or the football club because, so far, we haven't seen the accounts of either.

We'll turn in due course to the property valuations. Therein lie some other surprising features.

Very much looking forward to reading your views as and when you are able to give them.

I did have a little look at property in the 2017 accounts earlier today but could not really understand it enough.

Without looking it up again I saw there was a headline amount of £70m but the bottom line total was £30m.  I assumed there must have been some allowance for depreciation but could not understand how the value had fallen from £30m in 2017 to presumably £17.5m at the 1st July 2019, as that apparently was what FV paid for everything???

Then this £10m intellectual property amount popped up - so I wondered if it was some sort of 'balancing' amount to bring it back up to £27.5m (which seems a more reasonable decline of asset values over a couple of years from £30m?).

Even after thinking that I don't know how or where the £6m goodwill (valued as an assets within the £27.5m fitted in) as it hasn't got any tangible value per se?

I also thought if the top amount was £70m, it seems we had written down a great deal of assets to get to £30m but nobody seemed to had an issue with that when the accounts were published in 2017 so just figured that I probably wasn't understanding something that was indeed 'pucker'.

Stuff like this interests me, as no doubt people have noted by now, and although it may be 'boring' to many like Martin, it is absolutely critical to the existence of the club and its future.

I find it staggering that we've nearly gone to the wall due to lack of sensible financial control within the club, Bury did and Wigan were saved by some sort of a miracle - yet hardly anyone is arsed about at least trying to understanding a little bit of what the clubs finances are about- and ergo what its immediate future is going to be.

Each to their own I suppose but surely if you go out to work hard for a living do you not keep some sort of an eye on what you are spending or do you think you have a money tree at the bottom of your garden when you might need it like you presumably think BWFC has too?

Well Bury didn't and I'm interested to know what FV have planted at the bottom of our clubs garden.

Aren't you?



Just me and Bob then I guess...

I doubt that its the immediate future that's of concern, Sluffy, but there are some things in all this which are of interest over the longer term. Its not just you and I that are interested in this discourse btw; it is being 'followed' elsewhere.

Still nothing from the worthy Worthy. It took him a while to get a grasp of the history but he more or less got there in the end with a little prompting. If he's looked at these accounts, I expect he'll be scratching his head for a while. Figuring where £10million 'Intellectual Property' came from might be a starter.

I think the £6million for goodwill is 'the balancing figure' after the £10million was put down to intellectual property but that's a massive £16million booked down to 'intangibles'. Have a look at what's been booked down to 'land and buildings' compared to those in 2017. 

The financing of the operation is something else. I'll be taking a closer look at that including present and future interest costs.

Did you also notice the figure put down for administration? I haven't checked whether the administrators fees have been dealt with elsewhere but, in either case, 'Ouch'!

Here we go, Sluffy. I thought it had summat to do with tax. 

You can now get (tax) relief on purchases made on or after 1 April 2019 if the:

• goodwill and relevant assets are purchased when you buy a business with qualifying intellectual property (IP)
  
  

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

Ah, I think I'm beginning to understand it a little bit more but I'm still struggling with it.

I started off believing that FV paid £17.5m for everything - which I believe they did - so I added on to that amount the two 'things' that were 'new', the goodwill £6m and intellectual property £10m - which when added all together came to £33.5m.

However the total for all assets on the accounts to £27.5m

Now if they did pay £17.5m for everything and goodwill is an amount in excess of the value of the assets they bought, then they must have paid £11.5m for everything AND an extra £6m more because they thought the 'intangibles' that came with the sale was worth it?

If so that would value the non tangible assets at £11.5m?

And the accounts show them to be £12.2m (£11m of which for stadium, academy and land).



Now if I'm following your hints correctly(?) are you saying FV DID pay £17.5m for everything but showed on the accounts £10m for intellectual property and a balancing amount for goodwill (after a sum of £12.5m was stated for the fixed assets) to give a sum of £28.5m - but allowed it to claim tax relief on the purchase of the business?

£12.5m fixed assets + £10m intellectual property + £6m goodwill = £28.5m

During the accounting year £700k depreciation is shown for the intellectual property and good will, and a further £300k for stadium, land etc, which if you subtract that from the £28.5m arrives at the 'book' figure shown of £27.5m.


I'm still at a loss to understand what the £10m intellectual property is though (surely they can't just 'make up' things to claim tax on it?) there must be something more 'concrete' than that even for an intangible item - something the auditors would have accepted to put their name against???

If they have been shall we say 'creative' with the accounting to claim tax relief are we then moving into Dale Vince and Marcus Rashford and Gary Lineker territory?

Maybe I've misunderstood your hints perhaps?


Oh just a little sub note, I notice on the accounts it states (p29/p30 of 37) that the company has no fixed/intangible assets as at the 30th June 2020 - which I take to mean the assets are shown on the club and hotel accounts and not on the main FV account of which is the overall summary of all the companies accounts.

As for the Administration costs - is that the amount shown as £7,360,655 - if so ouch indeed!!!

I assume that is their running of the club and hotel during the Admin PLUS their fees - and not just their fees in isolation?


As for Worthy, I don't follow the Wanderers Forum much but he certainly was vitriolic in his views of Anderson on the times I paid that site a visit.

Maybe he's since retracted those views but if not and he reads the outcome of the previous years accounts in the way you have then it seems strange you both seem to agree on the accounts but have polar opposite views on the person responsible for running the company how he needed to do in the face of insolvency?

No. They didn't agree to pay £10million for intellectual property and they didn't agree to pay anything for goodwill either. They agreed to take on liabilities in return for ownership of the assets. 

That doesn't explain it all by any means and a bit more forensics will be needed to bottom it all. I'll get round to it in due course.

And no, its not really like Vince or Lineker but it does have all the appearance of a potential tax saving measure. I say potential because you need to be liable for tax in the first place and FV isn't in that territory and is unlikely to be without some exceptional gains. e.g. profit on player sales exceeding operating losses. 

I don't know if Worthy has changed his views and he was tetchy when challenged but he does seem to have an improved understanding of the pre-Anderson era if not the Anderson era itself.

Still no sign of the accounts at CH.

I couldn't help noticing that Accrington Stanley's ST had nice things to say about its owner on the 'Tracey Crouch show'. No idea what BWFC's reps had to say. The FSA hasn't published anything on its site.

Have Accrington filed their accounts? Yep. They filed them in March.

Thanks Bob.

True they didn't pay actual pounds, shillings and pence for the club as such but they will have to do if they want unfettered ownership of it by paying off the creditors.

The accounts show the valuation of the company assets and as such they include a value for £10m for intellectual property and £6m for goodwill as at the first of July 2019.

So somebody somewhere has said that's the case and the auditors have presumably satisfied themselves as that being so to sign the accounts off?

So presumably and legally they (FV) have some sort of 'intellectual property' to the value of £10m and paid £6m more in 'goodwill' than the debt/assets they have taken on - and that is shown as a factual statement in the accounts - isn't that the case?

And I'm getting confused yet again why they did state they have £10m of intellectual property if it wasn't to gain a tax relief on the purchase if you are now suggesting FV aren't in the territory of being able to potentially save any tax, any time soon? Have they do so just as a precaution on the chance they might do so one day?

As for Worthy I don't follow him but wasn't impressed with his clear hatred of Anderson and how he viewed KA should have paid everyone and everybody on time from a business that was clearly insolvent and could not.

Clearly his views of the owner took prescience over how companies have to run whilst in insolvency to stay the right side of not breaking the law.

Maybe with Anderson now out of the picture he is less prejudicial in his thinking again?

Sluffy wrote:Thanks Bob.

True they didn't pay actual pounds, shillings and pence for the club as such but they will have to do if they want unfettered ownership of it by paying off the creditors.

The accounts show the valuation of the company assets and as such they include a value for £10m for intellectual property and £6m for goodwill as at the first of July 2019.

So somebody somewhere has said that's the case and the auditors have presumably satisfied themselves as that being so to sign the accounts off?

So presumably and legally they (FV) have some sort of 'intellectual property' to the value of £10m and paid £6m more in 'goodwill' than the debt/assets they have taken on - and that is shown as a factual statement in the accounts - isn't that the case?

And I'm getting confused yet again why they did state they have £10m of intellectual property if it wasn't to gain a tax relief on the purchase if you are now suggesting FV aren't in the territory of being able to potentially save any tax, any time soon?  Have they do so just as a precaution on the chance they might do so one day?

As for Worthy I don't follow him but wasn't impressed with his clear hatred of Anderson and how he viewed KA should have paid everyone and everybody on time from a business that was clearly insolvent and could not.

Clearly his views of the owner took prescience over how companies have to run whilst in insolvency to stay the right side of not breaking the law.

Maybe with Anderson now out of the picture he is less prejudicial in his thinking again?

Sluffy, all of this is well beyond the expertise of FV. They've gone along with professional advisors who have told them how to gain any advantage achievable from the deal. You wouldn't tbh expect them to do any differently. 

The really big loser in it all was Sue Davies but all this holier than thou stuff doesn't impress me in the least. Quite the opposite in fact, but it is very much like Vince, Lineker and Rashford.

Worthy's saying nowt.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Sluffy, all of this is well beyond the expertise of FV. They've gone along with professional advisors who have told them how to gain any advantage achievable from the deal. You wouldn't tbh expect them to do any differently. 

The really big loser in it all was Sue Davies but all this holier than thou stuff doesn't impress me in the least. Quite the opposite in fact, but it is very much like Vince, Lineker and Rashford.

Worthy's saying nowt.

Thanks Bob.

I never doubted for one moment that the accounts were done other than by the finest of advise from the experts in these fields nor doubt for one moment the legality of them.

I'm not sure where your 'holier than thou' comment is aimed but if you meant me, then I'm holier than no one, I'm just an interested fan of the club trying to understand what's going on and where we are heading to - no more than that.

The accounts state amounts for intellectual property and goodwill - so there must be intellectual property in existence with a book value of £10m and a payment in excess of the value of everything the FV consortium purchased by £6m - otherwise it wouldn't be shown as the opening position in the year of purchase.

I'm also not utterly convinced that nothing changed hands on the purchase of the club etc, by FV from the Administrator.

There must have been some form of consideration that took place in order that the contract of sale and purchase to be legal - your user name is testament to how much Holdsworth and Anderson paid Eddie to take on the debt from him.

Maybe the consideration is the commitment to transfer the debt to the new company in secured creditor form (for EDT, PBP and Warburton) and agreement from the unsecured creditors to wait the two years for their 30p in the £?

Anyway that's a trivial matter - as is the intellectual property and goodwill really, in that non of them changes anything much and all we are left with is me trying to understand (more out of curiosity than anything else) what has happened and what it means in terms of the club going forward.

I really appreciate your help in this and all the previous times you have helped me in the past and I've certainly not intended to annoy you in any way (if indeed I have?).

Sluffy wrote:

Thanks Bob.

I never doubted for one moment that the accounts were done other than by the finest of advise from the experts in these fields nor doubt for one moment the legality of them.

I'm not sure where your 'holier than thou' comment is aimed but if you meant me, then I'm holier than no one, I'm just an interested fan of the club trying to understand what's going on and where we are heading to - no more than that.

The accounts state amounts for intellectual property and goodwill - so there must be intellectual property in existence with a book value of £10m and a payment in excess of the value of everything the FV consortium purchased by £6m - otherwise it wouldn't be shown as the opening position in the year of purchase.

I'm also not utterly convinced that nothing changed hands on the purchase of the club etc, by FV from the Administrator.  

There must have been some form of consideration that took place in order that the contract of sale and purchase to be legal - your user name is testament to how much Holdsworth and Anderson paid Eddie to take on the debt from him.

Maybe the consideration is the commitment to transfer the debt to the new company in secured creditor form (for EDT, PBP and Warburton) and agreement from the unsecured creditors to wait the two years for their 30p in the £?

Anyway that's a trivial matter - as is the intellectual property and goodwill really, in that non of them changes anything much and all we are left with is me trying to understand (more out of curiosity than anything else) what has happened and what it means in terms of the club going forward.

I really appreciate your help in this and all the previous times you have helped me in the past and I've certainly not intended to annoy you in any way (if indeed I have?).

'Holier than thou' was not in any way aimed at you, Sluffy, let me assure you 100% of that but it is imo part of the make-up of Messrs Vince, Lineker and Rashford and quite a few others.

I've tried to give enough clues and will try to explain it all in more detail and as diplomatically as I can muster when I've checked out all the figures but if 'Intellectual Property' was an integral feature of football clubs why do you suppose FV's bought £10million quids worth of it and no other club owners, to the best of my knowledge, have bought any (unless of course I've missed summat)?

Still no accounts at CH!!!!!

Ten Bobsworth wrote:'Holier than thou' was not in any way aimed at you, Sluffy, let me assure you 100% of that but it is imo part of the make-up of Messrs Vince, Lineker and Rashford and quite a few others.

I've tried to give enough clues and will try to explain it all in more detail and as diplomatically as I can muster when I've checked out all the figures but if 'Intellectual Property' was an integral feature of football clubs why do you suppose FV's bought £10million quids worth of it and no other club owners, to the best of my knowledge, have bought any (unless of course I've missed summat)?

Still no accounts at CH!!!!!

Thanks Bob.

I've no idea really, the only thing that comes to mind is if FV has bought the 'intellectual' rights to something and the obvious connection is the kettle element thingy that helped make Eddie rich.

I've no idea if Eddie does own the rights to such (or a share of them) or even if he did whether the person he left them to (presumably his wife) would want to sell them?

It would make some sense of why Sharon bought BWFC rather than any other club - and why she/FV stuck through thick and thin to finally acquire the club out of Administration.

It would also explain why there appears not to be a business plan - because the royalties would just keep rolling in and finance the club - until whatever the 'intellectual' thing they bought no longer applies anymore.

I would have though though that if that really did happen there would be some sort of record of it within the accounts?

Well on p17 of 37, it does indeed show a purchase of intangible assets for £8m under the heading investing activities, however I can't seem to see any revenue being shown resulting from it?

There doesn't seem to be any mention of this £8m purchase in the auditors notes either(?) maybe they are contained in the clubs audited accounts instead?

As Eddies kettle patent seems a bit far fetched to be a believable answer then maybe it is something to do why Kenyon and Phoenix were here?  Maybe they had created a Moneyball computer programme or something perhaps?

But if that was the case where are the details of this £8m purchase???

I can only wait like you until all the accounts are published and hopefully things then may get a little clearer then?

Its a bit of a tangled web, Sluffy, and they are not trifling amounts but I think you can safely assume that this 'intellectual property' conundrum has nowt to do with Eddie's kettles, Phoenix Nights or Kenyon's k-nowhow.

But if they did lash out £8.1million, as it says on page 14, who did FV pay it to?

Still no sign of any accounts at Companies House!

You're right Boncey, it is too quiet.
FV claimed they filed accounts last Tuesday but there's nowt on CH website.
Carlisle filed today and CH acknowledged receipt today.

The red warning sign's gone up at Companies House now on Football Ventures (Whites) Ltd.
Don't panic. It doesn't mean its about to go belly up.

Late filing can be an indicator of administration systems that are not up to the standards they should be. It can also be indicative of 'heel dragging' but it does mean that supporters are not getting the information they are legally entitled to by the deadlines set down in law. Twelve months is too long anyway.

Supporters of clubs in the Premiership and Championship generally provide only a minor proportion of football clubs' income. Its different in Leagues 1 and 2 where they are frequently the major providers of club funds.

Why haven't the accounts been filed though? They are filed electronically and the club said that the Football Ventures (Whites) Ltd accounts were filed on 30 June 2021.

P.S. Carlisle United filed their accounts yesterday. They were validated at Companies House within a few hours. Carlisle spent £1.4m on administration and turned in an £810K profit.

BWFC no longer under EFL Registration Embargo according to this, despite the red warning on the Companies House file about BWFC's failure to file its 2020 accounts. (See reasons for Swindon embargo).

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

There are a large number of clubs in the lower leagues of the EFL that don't have audited accounts anyway.

I like Carlisle and have always enjoyed visiting the place. The football club's interesting too starting off in the Lancashire Combination before eventually reaching the old Division 1 for one memorable season.

The club seems to run a tight ship. Last year's admin costs were £1.4m compared to Bolton's £7.3m. Even tin pot FGR spent £2.3m though that comes from greenies and lefties who don't mind paying over the odds for their leccy.

Not heard from you for a while, Sluffy, and I don't do Twitter but, according to this podcast, the club's accounts have been attracting interest in the Twittersphere. Has anyone noticed that they still haven't been filed?

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

You ought to listen to this. I've listened to 40 minutes of it and its taught me how absolutely blooming useless Maguire is and he's teaching accountancy students for heavens sake.

There's an old saying; you'll have heard it before: 'those who can do, those who can't teach'. That's Maguire to a T.

P.S. It does improve after 40 minutes but talk about waffling.

Thanks Bob, I've just listened to the whole of that and what a complete waste of time it was.

When you get the interviewer and Maguire praising Iles reporting on the financial matters at the club - and they did!!! - then you know that they are biased and prejudicial in their views and thus how they view and make their analysis.

For the current accounts Maguire commented that 'goodwill' was an asset you couldn't take down to the bank and cash in (nothing about why £6m has apparently been spend in excess of assets purchased?) and he similarly mentioned that the £10m for 'intellectual property' was simply for the name of the club?????

I believe there is far, far more to both things myself.

The interviewer is another of those who knows less about the subject than he thinks and Maguire one of those who seems to like the attention and the platform often afforded him, to be seen to be some sort of national expert on all things football financial related when in reality he seems to be the only one in the field and thus believed by most whether he is feeding us golden nuggets of information or biased bull shit.

They seemed to have enjoyed themselves and no doubt fans of Maguire and/or the LoV will enjoy it too - but for those of us who are less excitable in our ways and concentrate more on the detail and less on the invective of past owners (the interviewer threw in a dig about Eddie's 'soft debt' becoming a big problem for the club ffs!) then the hours listening brought us nothing that we already knew.

Fwiw I don't really think it did improve that much after 40 minutes either.

Why would Maguire know what the 6M was for?