'We have very little bank debt', says chairman Phil Gartside

Wanderers chairman Phil Gartside is not concerned about the club’s level of debt - and believes manager Dougie Freedman can build a team within the current financial constraints.

The club’s accounts published at the end of last year revealed the Whites were £163.8m in the red. But with most of that owed to owner Eddie Davies and his company Moonshift Investments, Gartside, pictured, says the club are comfortable with the situation.

He told Sky Sports: “Every time we’re mentioned in the press it’s alongside the fact that we’ve got a lot of debt.

“I keep repeating again and again that the debt is to the owner and is really equity – it’s no different to what people have done at Chelsea and other places.

“Eddie’s been a great benefactor to Bolton Wanderers over a period of 15 or 16 years and we are fortunate in that we own every asset and we have very little bank debt.

“There’s so much difference between what you get as a Premier League club and as a Championship club.

“I’ve said for many years that the gap’s too big now and we need to look at different ways of financing or structuring the league.

“The bottom Premier League club will receive £63m and you’re looking at £5m in the Championship – it’s not bridgeable even with parachute payments.”

Despite the difficulties financially ahead of a third successive season in the second tier, Gartside is positive about the future under Freedman.

He added: “I like the way he’s worked in the last couple of years and we have a good relationship.

“He knows the situation and he’s good at handling finances – he’s a businessman as well as a football manager and we’re privileged to have that.

“I’m looking forward to working with him for quite some time.”

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

All very obvious, but he doesn't answer the burning question: Exactly what are the financial restraints placed on Dougie?

It's obvious he's not being given the funds to contend for promotion - but we would like to know if it's even worse than that? And how much worse.

All a bit vague.

Little debt and little on the pitch..

If we have "very little bank debt" why have Barclays felt it necessary to seize control of the parachute payments en masse?

I think the fat man protesteth too much....yet again.

and the long term issue is still never answered, what is the long term plan for when Eddie pops his clogs or decides he's had enough?

The most depressing thing in that article is the last sentence.

I think that last line was a thinly veiled message to us fans.

"I'm not arsed that he's a bit tactically naive and is obsessed with trying to bore the life out of the opposition, he does as he's told, doesn't whinge about having no money and is just about good enough to keep us in mid-table, so he's going nowhere and there's no point in you lot moaning about him."

Breadman wrote:If we have "very little bank debt" why have Barclays felt it necessary to seize control of the parachute payments en masse?

I think the fat man protesteth too much....yet again.

I might be wrong but I think it is just about cash flow.

Our 'big' pay days are the periodic payments from Sky - the parachute - which I think comes in three installments, the day that monthly season tickets payments fall due and home match day income - however we have on going payments all the time - and therefore although we have money due to come in, we haven't got any cash there and then to pay the bills - which isn't a good thing!

The bank gives us an instant line of credit set against guaranteed income - namely the parachute payments.

Quite a common business practice really.

To be honest I now don't think the debt is a problem as somebody, somewhere as invested £150 million in the club (at least on paper), is currently still paying to keep the club going - we must still be making a loss, and doesn't seem to want the money back anytime soon - 10 year notice to repay!

I very much doubt that is all from Davies's pocket.

Makes you wonder where the money is coming from though?

At least it does me.

Breadman wrote:I think that last line was a thinly veiled message to us fans.

"I'm not arsed that he's a bit tactically naive and is obsessed with trying to bore the life out of the opposition, he does as he's told, doesn't whinge about having no money and is just about good enough to keep us in mid-table, so he's going nowhere and there's no point in you lot moaning about him."

  

Things have turned out quite nicely for Gartside this summer.

We finished last season well, so there's no major pressure to sack him, and Freedman's hardly in a position to be demanding, because he wouldn't get a better deal anywhere else.

You've hit the nail in the head Doff! That's exactly why he will be here for sometime to come!

He wouldn't survive another start like last year, Gartside couldn't handle the pressure.