Yeovil listen carefully. I shall say this only once

[coffeymagic]

Defeat against Yeovil isn't unthinkable. By all accounts they were all over QPR and were unlucky to lose. They've earned more points than us so why should we think that this game will be the one to 'kick start our blah blah blah.'?

As I have said (many times) I don't think he should go should we lose but I think he will.

The season isn't unsalvageable (yet) and a couple of wins will change everyone's mood.

Hopefully including the players.

This is me on my Wednesday setting of 'hopefull' It'll build to Friday's 'high expectation' only to be dashed on Saturday when it reverts to 'furious rage'.

But for now. Get behind 'em.

[thebish]

You can if you'e the sort of div who is always slagging Gartside off for not putting more money in!

ahh - i had underestimated the potential levels of divness! (divinity???)

[Peter Thompson]

Somewhat alarmingly for a successful businessman however, he has failed to notice that his Club Chairman has now presided over a six year decline in the club's fortunes, making a series of catastrophic decisions whilst attempting to raise his own profile. If he has taken notice, why hasn't he done anything about it? Seems an odd one to me.

This with bells on !!

One of the best posts I've read on here....

[thebish]

Somewhat alarmingly for a successful businessman however, he has failed to notice that his Club Chairman has now presided over a six year decline in the club's fortunes, making a series of catastrophic decisions whilst attempting to raise his own profile. If he has taken notice, why hasn't he done anything about it? Seems an odd one to me.

This with bells on !!

One of the best posts I've read on here....

well - except that Eddie's investment in Bolton is hardly a business decision, is it? it's a hobby, surely - and hobby-spending is never the same as businesshead-spending...

[LeverEnd]

I thought he was raking in a fortune in interest? Well, I read it on here, so someone might have made it up.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm not so sure. Looking on Wanderersways there is supposedly a campaign (which they are ridiculing quite rightly IMO) to protest against Gartside, not Freedman, on Facebook and twitter.

bit daft that... if they are choosing to campaign NOW against garty - then presumably they think he has made a mistake by appointing Dougie.. so - you can't really be FOR dougie and against garty...

My understanding is they like Dougie, but think Gartside is responsible for the demise of the club.

I don't get it either really.

It is apparent he isn't controlling the purse strings.

I think the argument is that being £100M in "debt" is Gartside's fault, appointing bad managers since Allardyce left is his fault, Allardyce leaving is his fault etc etc.

Not saying that is all not true, but I think it is a tad more complex than a Gartside out banner being the answer. Maybe.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm just slightly worried about an essentially faceless owner seemingly now making key decisions down to the level of short term loans of players. Something about this doesn't sit entirely right with me is all.

I don't think he is doing. I believe he's just refusing to bankroll any more spending. The outcome of that is we can't bring people in without losing one ... which, as a business decision, is fair enough.

If he is now persuaded to re-open those purse strings a little, as in speculate to accumulate, then I'm pleased but I don't view his position as being one running the rule over who is or isn't bought or sold just how much money he has to put in.

He's watching us struggle at a lower level, seeing crowds dropping into the teens and seeing no prospect of covering his loans to the club. That, rightly, worries him.

The implication from Nixon (I know but....) is that Eddie was making decisions individually. Hence his bankrolling the Spearing deal, but nowt after that.

And that it came down to individual deals being sanctioned or not (see Moritz delay).

We don't know how much of that is true. There will be another side to it. But it feels like in the past Eddie gave a budget out and said get on with it to PG and the manager. I'm not 100% sure that is the case anymore.

[Wandering Willy]

That, of course, could be complete fabrication.

[Athers]

I hope it is fairly simple -

We're still losing a lot of money every year so I imagine any increase on wage bill beyond what we have forecast for this year is when ED needs to be 'convinced' to essentially expand his already massive loan beyond what he's already agreed to do.

Hence the shuffling out of Sordell and Andrews.

[Harry Genshaw]

Just reminded my neighbour of his drunken promise to get me tickets for home games via his company for a tenner. Got two! What a star.

Before I was going I was expecting a nervy 2-1 win. Now I demand a free flowing all out attacking performance. 5-1 win

[TKIZ!]

Neil Danns hat trick?

[Hoboh]

I'm just slightly worried about an essentially faceless owner seemingly now making key decisions down to the level of short term loans of players. Something about this doesn't sit entirely right with me is all.

I don't think he is doing. I believe he's just refusing to bankroll any more spending. The outcome of that is we can't bring people in without losing one ... which, as a business decision, is fair enough.

If he is now persuaded to re-open those purse strings a little, as in speculate to accumulate, then I'm pleased but I don't view his position as being one running the rule over who is or isn't bought or sold just how much money he has to put in.

He's watching us struggle at a lower level, seeing crowds dropping into the teens and seeing no prospect of covering his loans to the club. That, rightly, worries him.

The implication from Nixon (I know but....) is that Eddie was making decisions individually. Hence his bankrolling the Spearing deal, but nowt after that.

And that it came down to individual deals being sanctioned or not (see Moritz delay).

We don't know how much of that is true. There will be another side to it. But it feels like in the past Eddie gave a budget out and said get on with it to PG and the manager. I'm not 100% sure that is the case anymore.

I wouldn't give Gartside the time of day never mind a budget!

[Lord Kangana]

That, of course, could be complete fabrication.

Probaly closet to the truth anyone has got on this thread.

[thebish]

I wouldn't give Gartside the time of day never mind a budget!

i bet he's distraught to hear that!

[Worthy4England]

Somewhat alarmingly for a successful businessman however, he has failed to notice that his Club Chairman has now presided over a six year decline in the club's fortunes, making a series of catastrophic decisions whilst attempting to raise his own profile. If he has taken notice, why hasn't he done anything about it? Seems an odd one to me.

Anyone recall the "no relegation and 2 Division Premiership proposal"?

I suspect that wasn't mooted in 2008 (so almost six years), just on a whim...I'd also be tempted to suggest that our financial position (benefactor: Mr. E. Davies) might have had something to do with it too...

[coffeymagic]

On the subject of Sir Eddie and his business acumen I was watching Panorama the other week and it was talking about how the Tories (who are like omg so against tax evasion I mean like they're totes against it and everything) have introduced laws which allow businesses to borrow £££'s which they then bank over seas.

The interest on the loan is then seen as a debt which they can write off against profits in the UK eliminating their tax obligations.

If Eddie is using BWFC to lump all his 'debt' into while having thirty concubines in hula-skirts and clam bras counting his money in Tahiti then I'd say he's perfectly sane and more than happy for Bolton to be as many £X in the red as they can be.

Don'f forget though, you try and do a bit of cash in hand and your goin' dahn sunshine!

[BWFC_Insane]

Somewhat alarmingly for a successful businessman however, he has failed to notice that his Club Chairman has now presided over a six year decline in the club's fortunes, making a series of catastrophic decisions whilst attempting to raise his own profile. If he has taken notice, why hasn't he done anything about it? Seems an odd one to me.

Anyone recall the "no relegation and 2 Division Premiership proposal"?

I suspect that wasn't mooted in 2008 (so almost six years), just on a whim...I'd also be tempted to suggest that our financial position (benefactor: Mr. E. Davies) might have had something to do with it too...

According to PG it was never mooted, by him at least. He just wanted a license system so clubs had to meet minimum standards (quality of ground etc) before being granted a "premiership license".

[Puskas]

I thought he was raking in a fortune in interest? Well, I read it on here, so someone might have made it up.

The accounts are available here:
http://www.bwfc.co.uk/documents/burnden ... 470561.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Burnden Leisure paid out just over 9million in interest payments last year. How much of that went to Moonshift Investments isn't stated. Probably a fair amount, though, since that's where the majority of the debt is owed.

Moonshift investments also received 2.8million in "Player performance fees". I make no further comment....

[Gary the Enfield]

I thought he was raking in a fortune in interest? Well, I read it on here, so someone might have made it up.

The accounts are available here:
http://www.bwfc.co.uk/documents/burnden ... 470561.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Burnden Leisure paid out just over 9million in interest payments last year. How much of that went to Moonshift Investments isn't stated. Probably a fair amount, though, since that's where the majority of the debt is owed.

Moonshift investments also received 2.8million in "Player performance fees". I make no further comment....

Only fair. If the players played shit presumably they gave Eddie some of their wages back. Or is that not what it means?

[thebish]