Phil Gartside speaks: 14 big questions answered by under-fire chairman

terenceanne wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

terenceanne wrote:The statement of concern refers to the fact that Eddie does not want to put anymore money in.  Fair enough ....but now put the club up for sale.  We need an owner that wants to put cash in and build up the club if possible.  What is the exact point of Eddie owning this club for the next few years?   
Phil says there have been no offers but have they really gone worldwide touting BWFC for sale...I think not.

takes two too tango, the utter lack of respect towards Eddie is astounding at times. Without him you wouldn't have a club to shout for.

but thanks eddie now kindly piss off cos you've spunked all your money on us. 

I remember reading rumours that Gartside was in the far east hawking the club about last year and he hints that there have been discussions in that interview but clearly it's quite hard selling a club with almost nothing going for it (business wise before anyone goes there)

You have answered your own question...." a club with almost nothing going for it".....  imagine a regular business where the management had taken the company down to be worthless, laid off the employees and up to the eyeballs in debt.  Yet all the management is still in place....what would the stockholders say I wonder.

And dare I say you've answered yours. This isn't a "regular" business, and never will be.

You know full well how football clubs are valued, wipe away our debt, stick us back in the prem if you like, and we'd still not be interesting to any investors, and those reasons are nothing to do with Eddie or Gartside.

None of us is probably ever going to know exactly what's been going on behind the scenes at Bolton but it's starting to become clearer that what actually happens on the pitch is less and less important to the "overall plan" with every passing season.

All we can hope for is that once all these "assets that aren't really assets because they're listed as debts" (not sure how that works, but I'm not an accountant) according to Gartside in that interview start to generate revenue for the club, a good proportion of it will be reinvested in the football team.

Let's be honest, we personally don't have any vested financial interest in how the "non-football" business operates - we're just here for the football.

I'm just starting to get a little concerned about what the future holds.

The football team no longer seems to be a priority for Gartside and Davies and that worries me.

It's as if they've given up on it and aren't too worried about what happens to it, so long as their grand plan for building car parks, hotels and god knows what else continues unabated.

I'm honestly worried for the long-term future of the football team because the cynic in me is screaming that ED and Gartside are using their positions as judge and jury at BWFC to create this massive property portfolio by using money from the club to realise their dream, with little or no consideration for the effects on the football team.

I suppose my big fear is that in five years we could be playing in League Two in front of 3000 happy clappers and suddenly all his ducks are in line and ED flogs the whole shebang to some other chancer for £500 million.

The football team will be incidental and all the potential profit for the new owner will be the property portfolio.

Alarmist.....?

Possibly.

But I'm just struggling to understand how we've got where we are and I'm trying to work out what ED's grand plan is.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

terenceanne wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

terenceanne wrote:The statement of concern refers to the fact that Eddie does not want to put anymore money in.  Fair enough ....but now put the club up for sale.  We need an owner that wants to put cash in and build up the club if possible.  What is the exact point of Eddie owning this club for the next few years?   
Phil says there have been no offers but have they really gone worldwide touting BWFC for sale...I think not.

takes two too tango, the utter lack of respect towards Eddie is astounding at times. Without him you wouldn't have a club to shout for.

but thanks eddie now kindly piss off cos you've spunked all your money on us. 

I remember reading rumours that Gartside was in the far east hawking the club about last year and he hints that there have been discussions in that interview but clearly it's quite hard selling a club with almost nothing going for it (business wise before anyone goes there)

You have answered your own question...." a club with almost nothing going for it".....  imagine a regular business where the management had taken the company down to be worthless, laid off the employees and up to the eyeballs in debt.  Yet all the management is still in place....what would the stockholders say I wonder.

And dare I say you've answered yours. This isn't a "regular" business, and never will be.

You know full well how football clubs are valued, wipe away our debt, stick us back in the prem if you like, and we'd still not be interesting to any investors, and those reasons are nothing to do with Eddie or Gartside.

Every other day there are stories about clubs similar to ours being looked at or deals going back and forth.  We are not marketed correctly that's all.  BWFC is not a worldwide brand...and it should have been while we were in the Prem. Meanwhile I presume from your comments that you think the club is a well run organization and no changes required.  Let's agree to differ then.

I must have missed all these deals going on every single day for clubs similar to ours. 

but yes lets leave it there.

Terrence and Hull's owner Assem Allam are right, case in point Hull City. If they were called the Hull Tigers, then they'd be marketed correctly and a worldwide brand like Barca. 

It's all that simple.

Is here anybody out there who thinks that ED has put his own money into the club, like he's got a safe behind his desk and every so often Gartside has been to him, cap in hand and said "Eddie....I need £2 million quid" and ED has then opened it and handed over a bag of coins?

Just supposition on my part, but the more I think about it, the more I reckon ED is just the face of Moonshift and the money is coming from somewhere else, probably a conglomerate of venture capitalists who just use him deal with Gartside.

I obviously have no idea how much of his own wedge he has invested, but I'd imagine he's just one part of a much bigger team, so all this talk of "Eddie lending the club £150 million of his own cash" is just bollocks.

(He never had anywhere near that much to start with.)

In simple terms, I reckon it's like this:

Moonshift's board is say, ten people, who have all stumped up (for argument's sake) £3m each to acquire the majority shareholding in BWFC.

Eddie is now nominally in charge of BWFC. (Makes sense - us gullible twats in Bolton have bought the "Eddie's just a fan like you!" line from Day One.)

The new company is then able to borrow money against the club and do what it likes with the TV money.

So they think "Fuck the football, there's no money in that. Let's build some hotels and car parks!"

And the paper debt steadily starts to rise......

And they would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't have been for that pesky Coyle kid getting the team relegated - because the new TV money would have covered the debt and nobody would have noticed what they were up to. Genius!

But we did get relegated and now the footballing side of things is in deep shit.

And people are asking awkward questions about where all the money's gone, so Gartside gets wheeled out to do what he does best - smile like a snake and lie his head off.

As I say, I might be wrong but it's certainly looking that way to me.

When asked about the debt.

' I’m sick of answering that question. If someone has been willing to invest that sort of money in this football team, why does anyone complain about it?
Where has the money gone? Well we have all the assets – the stadium, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ground, hotel, car parks the lot'.

So the chairman doesn't like being asked about the £160,000,000 debt. Well Mr.Gartside it's a question I hope you are asked every day of your life. The loyal supporters need to know and the least you can do is provide a civil answer, you are after all being paid £800,000 a year to do just that.
Your explanation being, stadium, training ground, hotel, car parks is not a satisfactory answer. These assets come to nowhere near £160 million.
Last year BWFC posted a loss of over £50 million, where did that go Gartside?  

More from Gartside :-
'We have made a tremendous effort to get this club into order. The players’ wage bill has come down from £50million-plus to £20million in two years'.

If 24 squad players were each paid £30,000 a week this would come to less than £40 million. There is no way on gods earth the Bolton Wanderers have ever paid 24 players 30,000 a week. This figure of £50million + for players wages that Gartside quoted is ludcruos.

Well Mr. Gartside I have one more question for you. As well as deciding how much to pay yourself, do you also decide if you should sack yourself?

There is only one way to get rid of this leech on the club, fan power.
******************* GARTSIDE OUT ********************

Breadman wrote:None of us is probably ever going to know exactly what's been going on behind the scenes at Bolton but it's starting to become clearer that what actually happens on the pitch is less and less important to the "overall plan" with every passing season.

So much speculation about how much invested, how much returned, how they approached it etc.....all bollocks. Starting to become clearer? It was obvious more than a year ago that austerity and putting the balance sheet right would take priority over investing money in football players and the ramifications of that are massive. Dougie knew it and was prepared to work within those constraints - let's hope the next mug accepts it. Dougie is a shit manager on many levels but sacking him without a replacement lined up was just dumb.  

One thing is clear though. If the club folds everything else is irrelevant so I'd rather put up with shit football (and before you start I will be attending more games this year) and even relegation if it means we don't become extinct.

Breadman wrote:The football team no longer seems to be a priority for Gartside and Davies and that worries me.

It's as if they've given up on it and aren't too worried about what happens to it, so long as their grand plan for building car parks, hotels and god knows what else continues unabated.

A very cynical person might think they were deliberately trying to make the attendances fall so low that the football club can be re-located to a smaller site or groundshare with Horwich RMI or the like.

And was there ever a dodgier name for a company than Moonshift.

The wage bills are published ours was over 40 million in the prem if I remember rightly, might be wrong.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:The wage bills are published ours was over 40 million in the prem if I remember rightly, might be wrong.

Yes you are right, wage bill, but there was no breakdown as to just who got what. Very easy to hide a few £10s of millions under this heading.

In Gartside's Q&A with the BN he said that the wage bill for the players was over £50 million.
I repeat, Bolton Wanderers have never in a million years paid 24 players over £30,000 a week. It is obviously untrue.

Mr. Gartside, I do not believe you and in case you haven't got the message - Be gone with you, never to return. You are not welcome here.

Some people will have been on more than that. 

Gavin Mccann was getting 30.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:Some people will have been on more than that. 

Gavin Mccann was getting 30.

Yes I'm quite sure but my point is we are expected to believe that 24 players were on that kind of money.

Ok, Captain Grumpy.....

Why's it bollocks?

It's a speculative opinion, as I pointed out in both comments.

Do the figures stack up for you?

Can you offer any cogent theories about how we've run up a debt that would make a small African country blush?

Do you honestly believe what Gartside's telling us about this whole sorry mess?

Enlighten us.......

chipbutty wrote:

Yes I'm quite sure but my point is we are expected to believe that 24 players were on that kind of money.

The 1st team has more than 24 players. I'm pretty sure the actual number is over 29.

Reebok Trotter wrote:

chipbutty wrote:

Yes I'm quite sure but my point is we are expected to believe that 24 players were on that kind of money.

The 1st team has more than 24 players. I'm pretty sure the actual number is over 29.

24....?

29.........?

99..............?

The point (as I understand it), RT, is that there would only have been a small number of them on that kind of money, not the majority.

I don't know what each individual player actually earns but you can bet the annual accounts will reflect the total budget for players wages.

Reebok Trotter wrote:I don't know what each individual player actually earns but you can bet the annual accounts will reflect the total budget for players wages.  

AS I read it, that was kind of Chipbitty's whole point - the published accounts don't accurately reflect what's really going on and the figures are bent.

Like Gartside.

Under FFP I suspect it is more difficult to cover things up and hide anomalies. I could be wrong.

This was a good thread but Ramsay's Costa Nightmares or summat is on.