Bolton's Finances / Accounts for year ending 30th June 2021 and everything else since.

Norpig wrote:I knew you'd come round to my way of thinking about Bob eventually Sluffy 

I'm quite staggered really, obviously I could see for myself how he treated everyone, you in particular but I just put that down to his intolerance of everyone being anti-Anderson, as Bob had been a big help to me in making some sense of what had been happening with the financial doings at the club.

He treated me in a master - student type of way but again I put that down as him having old fashion ways and probably years of doing so teaching those junior to him in his profession.

I also saw that he was cautious in what and how much he said in respect of the financial dealings, he never put his reputation on the line by making definite statements (for instance Wanderlust's utterly ridiculous and factually wrong claim the Anderson had taken £164m out of the club to put in his own pocket) or giving the full story.

He always wanted to be in full control of the narrative and wasn't open to simply telling anyone the full story - look for instance of this saga over why the Administrator ruled against EDT and KA's claim for security which happened four years ago now - he still hasn't got around to spelling out what he claims to have happened - hence why I told him either to shit or get off the pot - meaning if he wants to tell us, then tell us, if he doesn't then keep it to himself and shut up about it.

It's always been clear he holds a view of being superior to others and treating people as being below him, evidenced by his constant demeaning of everyone, calling us blockheads, not having thinking heads on, and all the rest - no doubt he can get away with such in his home and career bubbles but it simply isn't acceptable in normal life and why he's been threatened with violence from someone off ww and how you and others react to him on here.

Even knowing the reaction he gets he still believes he's entitled to carry on doing so because we are all dumber than him as far as he's concerned.

As I say I was staggered to his reaction to me when I gave an alternative and legally plausible alternative to his claims over the Administrators decision - his view being basically a conspiracy theory, mine being simply following the laws on a company under Administration.

I never claimed I was right as I'm not party to what actually went on - but then again neither was Bob, but from that moment on he has set out to destroy me in belittling and ridiculing me and by implication my theory as well.

He's picked on the wrong person though, I can and will stand my ground and give him shit back (and I don't mean name calling, he can handle that), which I very much suspect he's never had to deal with over the years as I suspect everyone has had to bite their tongues and keep to their places with him being the big cheese in their worlds.

It's up to him now what he wants from Nuts, if he wants to wind his neck in a bit then he's welcome to stay and I'll ease up on him again, if he wants a war then he best find somewhere else to spread his gospel.

Up to him really as I managed well enough to know the likes of Wanderlust and everyone else was wrong about Anderson in terms of Company Law and no doubt again can manage to get some idea of what is going on in the future, with or without his help - so he doesn't have any hold on me if that is what he may think.

I can manage well enough without him than put up with his shit anymore, if he needs it spelling out to him.

There’s no way of wrapping it up Sluffy. It’s sad but you have simply lost it.


I trust your new  ‘alliance of science’ with Norpig pays the ‘dividends’ you seem to be hoping for.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:There’s no way of wrapping it up Sluffy. It’s sad but you have simply lost it.


I trust your new  ‘alliance of intellects’ with Norpig pays the ‘dividends’ you seem to be hoping for.

I've lost nothing Bob other than the constant belittlement and put downs that you have recently decided to bury me under simply because I gave an alternative solution to a question you asked of me.

I never even claimed it to be right - I don't know what the truth is because I wasn't party to the event and neither were you - but for all your bluster and your supposed genius on the subject , you CAN'T PROVE IT TO BE WRONG - or you would have done so long before now.

My theory stands and you know it does.

This has clearly irked you enormously.

You can't be as cocksure that you are definitively right with your 'conspiracy' theory you continue to hint at but refuse to explain to anyone - even FOUR YEARS after the event!

Hence your attempt to rubbish me.

Well I've got the balls to stand my ground, I'm not cowered by the likes of you.



And I'm my own man, Bob, always have been, I stand alone.

I'm in no alliance with anyone other than with truth and honesty.

I don't seek popularity and I don't compromise my principles and that's how I live my life and administer this forum.

Christ I've demonstrated that enough times on here if you hadn't already noticed.

If you don't like me or the forum, then you know where the door is.

To be fair Bob, it’s a good post that

I suggest that you move on from this subject now.

karlypants wrote:To be fair Bob, it’s a good post that

I suggest that you move on from this subject now.

Which subject would that be, KP? 

The finances and FV accounts have attracted over 35,600 tugboats between them so far. Even poor old Boncey's getting close to being overtaken and that's not counting the Dubious Dale or the Miraculous Marcus threads.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
Which subject would that be, KP? 

The finances and FV accounts have attracted over 35,600 tugboats between them so far. Even poor old Boncey's getting close to being overtaken and that's not counting the Dubious Dale or the Miraculous Marcus threads.

No no, Bob. Those are just views on the latest volume. I've got over ten prior volumes to go at. Don't even dream about catching up.

boltonbonce wrote:
No no, Bob. Those are just views on the latest volume. I've got over ten prior volumes to go at. Don't even dream about catching up.

I do appreciate that Boncey but how many years has it taken for your latest volume to attract so many cops in  tugboats?

Anyroad  anything that's four years old shouldn't count.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
I do appreciate that Boncey but how many years has it taken for your latest volume to attract so many cops in  tugboats?

Anyroad  anything that's four years old shouldn't count.

Sadly, after a while the numbers get reset, and they'll be down to under a hundred for both threads, and it all starts again.

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

boltonbonce wrote:
Sadly, after a while the numbers get reset, and they'll be down to under a hundred for both threads, and it all starts again.

If I were bothered and I was Piers Morgan, I might ask the question again, Boncey. But I'm not and I'm not so I won't.

I see that FV finances are open for debate on Wandererswallys but are still locked on Nuts. As per usual its a fairly uninformed debate involving two of Nuts regulars, Lusty and WS63.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:I see that FV finances are open for debate on Wandererswallys but are still locked on Nuts. As per usual its a fairly uninformed debate involving two of Nuts regulars, Lusty and WS63.

63 was on the boltonnews site too. He gets about a bit.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:I see that FV finances are open for debate on Wandererswallys but are still locked on Nuts. As per usual its a fairly uninformed debate involving two of Nuts regulars, Lusty and WS63.

Bye then, off you fuck to WW, oh sorry you're barred from there aren't you? I'm seeing a pattern here.

Norpig wrote:
Bye then, off you fuck to WW, oh sorry you're barred from there aren't you? I'm seeing a pattern here.

You can always count on Walter to see a pattern.  

Ten Bobsworth wrote:I see that FV finances are open for debate on Wandererswallys but are still locked on Nuts. As per usual its a fairly uninformed debate involving two of Nuts regulars, Lusty and WS63.

I'd say it was far worse than misinformed it was clear that they simply didn't know what they are talking about - everyone of them as far as I can make out.

For example let us say the owner of the club wants to put £20m of his own money into the club for some reason or other, they can simply put it in as a loan (which basically Eddie did for much of the £200m he eventually wrote off), or they can simply buy £20m worth of shares.

Putting it in via a loan creates the club being in debt to that person for £20m, putting it is by buying shares doesn't create any debt on the club at all.

If however if you put it in as a loan to start off with then swop the loan for shares instead (changing debt to equity) then the balance sheet would show that the club has reduced it debt to creditors by £20m,

That is more or less what has happened at BWFC.

FV initially 'loaned' the money to the club - hence the two lots of £10m (or whatever it really was) that Sharon and Luckock initially put in, which they later 'swopped' to buy shares with.

On paper the club had cut its debts by £20m

But all that had really happened was that it was the same money, still in the club, but simply counted in a different way.

When FV eventually comes to sell the business the buyer simply has to buy the majority of the shares for a takeover.

If there are now £20m more shares out there, then it will still cost them the same £20m to buy them - as it would have cost them £20m to settle the creditors if that money had been left as a loan and not turned to equity (used to buy shares).

The net result is the likes of W63 et al on ww thinking the clubs done brilliant to have a 'reasonably' low debt, when in fact nothing much has changed because it was always the same money (whether it be as a loan or in shares of the company) and it will cost the prospective new owner of the club the same £20m to either settle the loan or buy the £20m more shares that had been created by the money.

They simply don't understand what is happening and simply follow the idiots like Wanderlust who tells them with some 'authority' (because he's told us he has an MBA, has four lots of accountants working to him and that he is a Business Consultant) that Anderson has walked off with £164m.

Anderson didn't and the clubs debt is not at a reasonable level, it's just the same money reported in a different way that effects whether the club has a large debt or the money used to buy shares instead.

Not sure why one of them dreads me making a return though - not that I would, I'm banned too and I'm not desperate enough to create another account to join a forum that doesn't want any help from me in the first place - but surely if someone (me in the case) can answer their query, wouldn't you want to know the answer than prefer to continue to really not have a clue about what is happening at all???

I know I would - even if it was Wanderlust who was the one who had the knowledge to tell me it.

I'd say that there are some that are interested, Sluffy, and they are trying but there don't seem to be any that have quite grasped it all.

FV keep their cards close to their chests and that does make it more difficult to decipher. Kobeer, for example, seems to misunderstand the nature of the shareholdings. Sharon is looking after the interests of two fellow investors, as well as her own, so is she really likely to have given up overall control without a fight, as Kobeer's number-crunching infers? We should know more in a couple of months time when the next confirmation statement is filed.

Size of debt matters but the nature of the debt matters too. The ability to manage cash flow is the big issue now and always has been. FV should be in a better position to handle that in the short term as a result of new share issues and the bond scheme bringing in £9-10m this year.

But the bond money is debt and much of the money from shares is likely to be funding ongoing operating deficits. Overall though, it does look like we are in a stronger financial position than for some time. Its a different game of soldiers to be competitive in the Championship.

It still looks like it hasn't dawned on the WW gang that Evatt and Hart's shares don't have a vote and that they would only get a share of any capital value in excess of the £39million 'hurdle value'.

Eddie got a quid and we were one promotion away from the Premier League at that time.

It doesn't take much does it? Iles has got the Beeno boneheads in a frenzy all over again followed in close proximity by the Wandererswallys finest.

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

Ken is taking an interest in Reading.

boltonbonce wrote:Ken is taking an interest in Reading.

Flipping eck, Boncey, you're cooking with gas this morning aren't you?

If you've just got up, the test match score at COP on day three is:

Tugboats 600/0
 
Maybe the Numbnuts should bring on Sluffy with his googlies or Walter with his slow left-armers.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:Ken is taking an interest in Reading.

Flipping eck, Boncey, you're cooking with gas this morning aren't you?

If you've just got up, the test match score at COP on day three is:

Tugboats 600/0
 
Maybe the Numbnuts should bring on Sluffy with his googlies or Walter with his slow left-armers.

Well done Bob, for your 3,000th post you've managed to insult Bonce, Norpig and me in it, as well as living in your delusional world that 600 more 'real' people are following this thread avidly.

Takes some doing does that but as you proved many times it comes effortlessly to you...