The Debt.

[BWFC_Insane]

There are two things I don't understand.

One is that we must have known for a long time where this was headed. So why didn't anyone do anything about it? Or did they try and put deals in place and fail?

Secondly a week ago Birch came in and we were told he was here to negotiate a deal to sell the club in Gartside's absence. Then the message was still one of calm, we're negotiating, debt isn't a problem and will be wiped.

A week later and we're in a "perilous position" and can't pay our players. Whether you believe impending administration or not (and a week ago I wouldn't have considered it for a second) it is clear things are desperate. How have things got so badly so quickly? And again if they haven't and have been this way for a long while, what has been happening behind the scenes to prevent this mess from happening?

EDIT: On the blog Iles has just said he understands voluntary administration has been discussed.

Exactly what I don't get, and something I've been saying (as I'm sure others have too) for a good season or two as it's become evident that ED was losing interest/money running out, delete as appropriate, as our budgets have reduced from moderate, to small, to non-existent. To me that blame lies with PG; as much as I wish him well with his recovery this happened on his watch. He's not managed our budget well, known that ED has wanted to sell for quite some time with his debt notice a few years back, yet has seemingly sat by and done nothing. They only went public about wanting to sell a month or two ago when it should have been done well before that in my opinion - clubs are normally up for sale for months before there's any breakthrough.

I really don't get how it's been seemingly bungled over such a long period of time without someone going "hang on, we need to line up further investment to secure our long term future".

They've spoken publically about the club being up for sale for years now. Not in the exact same sense but it has been fairly widely known.

Whatever the situation this is an absolute mess. I have no idea where the blame lies or what has really happened, but I do feel we simply cannot know the full story here. Too much doesn't make any real sense.

[Prufrock]

Does anyone know if the bank loans are secured against anything? I mean, it seems you'd have to be mad to loan anything to a football club without getting security, but then you might have thought it mad to give a $500k mortgage to a southern hillbilly with no job against a trailer worth $8.50.

[Worthy4England]

Does anyone know if the bank loans are secured against anything? I mean, it seems you'd have to be mad to loan anything to a football club without getting security, but then you might have thought it mad to give a $500k mortgage to a southern hillbilly with no job against a trailer worth $8.50.

Our July loan with Nucleus is securitized against assets...I'd be surprised if our bank loan wasn't too...

[midlands exile]

Well it could've all happened 14/15 years ago, when ED joined the board and we were £33m in debt, without a pot to piss in...and according to the Accounts struggling to find any long term investment.

So yes, still happy that someone was barmy enought to throw shitloads at it.

Heard that when ED bought the club cut price was at least one other option, which may (or may not) have been a better deal. The accounts tell us what PG wants to tell us. And before anyone trots out, "they've been audited by Deloitte", well that checks for compliance, and there are legal ways of presenting accounts to maximum benefit for the owner. In fact, the big four make good business out of selling such schemes and services themselves.

I won't repeat my views on how much ED's bwfc adventure has truly cost him, as I seem to be swimming against the tide here. But look at the state of the club now as to when he bought the club. Over the last 8 years it's been poor decision after poor decision, which most supporters couldn't believe as they happened. If he wanted to squander his fortune, that's his choice, but if he's done that while driving us out of business then forgive me if I'm not keen. On the other hand, if he's taken us to where we are with limited exposure to risk personally, then I've much stronger terms for him.

Him and PG have had a decade to put all the big talk into practice and make us a sustainable football club, yet all the key messages we've heard have been lies. The debt isn't a problem. We have plans in place to avoid financial ruin if we're relegated. We're a trading club. All balls, this is worse than the last days of Colin Todd, I'd say it's worse than the 80's too, barring a miracle we're screwed.

[Worthy4England]

I am generally aware that Accounts don't always paint the accurate picture, but one which is good enough to satisfy the Auditor

The state of the Club now is we have less debt than when he took office if we can find a buyer
We have 200 additional management and admin staff
13 additional players
The asset value is broadly the same @ £45m - £47m
Consolidate P&L showed a loss of £6.4m last year and a loss of £8m in 2001

We had a problem in 2001 had ED not come along, we have a problem now that he's walking away...Don't think we had a solution then, we clearly don't have a solution now (albeit it's fairly clear that we needed to get more cost out than we have done)

[Gudnib]

I am generally aware that Accounts don't always paint the accurate picture, but one which is good enough to satisfy the Auditor

The state of the Club now is we have less debt than when he took office if we can find a buyer
We have 200 additional management and admin staff
13 additional players
The asset value is broadly the same @ £45m - £47m
Consolidate P&L showed a loss of £6.4m last year and a loss of £8m in 2001

We had a problem in 2001 had ED not come along, we have a problem now that he's walking away...Don't think we had a solution then, we clearly don't have a solution now (albeit it's fairly clear that we needed to get more cost out than we have done)

When you say 'last year' you mean year ended 30 June 2014. i.e. quite along time ago now.
Did you notice that they weren't signed off and filed until 30 June 2015?
Punching above our weight, says Gerry Taggart - doing it on Eddie Davies money until it ran out!

[Worthy4England]

Yeah - 2014 Accounts...and yes noticed they weren't signed off to June - we got a formal warning note to submit them...

[BWFC_Insane]

Given the threat of administration seems to be real judging by what Iles is saying on the blog there is a serious point just raised on there.

IF Davies is seriously vetting prospective buyers to gauge their suitability for buying the club and funding it, then surely selling to one, even with limited funds is in the better interests of the club than letting it slip into administration and then have one of the parties buy it from that point.

To me it suggests this is more about Eddie getting his pound of flesh than worrying about the longer term health of the club.

[jetsetwilly]

Selling the assets such as the ground are not that easy with a sitting tennant.

Pretending to do all you can to find a buyer but failing.

Going into admin.

Going bust

Selling off the assets as no football team needs them.

= £45m or so in his pocket.

Those of you who want to think that Eddie has spent £185m of money he neevr had, and that Phil Gartside is the devil, carry on. But Eddie knew what Phil was doing. he kept paying him those bonus payments.

This is all part of the big plan. I promise you, neither ED or PG will have done badly out of this club.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Given the threat of administration seems to be real judging by what Iles is saying on the blog there is a serious point just raised on there.

IF Davies is seriously vetting prospective buyers to gauge their suitability for buying the club and funding it, then surely selling to one, even with limited funds is in the better interests of the club than letting it slip into administration and then have one of the parties buy it from that point.

To me it suggests this is more about Eddie getting his pound of flesh than worrying about the longer term health of the club.

I don't understand your logic jump from paragraph 2 to 3.

But then that's partly because I still believe that it's also in Eddie's interests not to regain 1p in the £1 via administration.

[midlands exile]

I am generally aware that Accounts don't always paint the accurate picture, but one which is good enough to satisfy the Auditor

The state of the Club now is we have less debt than when he took office if we can find a buyer
We have 200 additional management and admin staff
13 additional players
The asset value is broadly the same @ £45m - £47m
Consolidate P&L showed a loss of £6.4m last year and a loss of £8m in 2001

We had a problem in 2001 had ED not come along, we have a problem now that he's walking away...Don't think we had a solution then, we clearly don't have a solution now (albeit it's fairly clear that we needed to get more cost out than we have done)

When are you talking about? Since he was on the board or when he bought out the existing shareholders?

Is an additional 200 support staff really a good thing? I haven't seen much of an increase in the level of service as a "customer", and have they really earned their crust in our performance as a business?
13 more players - so what, if they're all crap.
Asset value - additional built asset value cancelled out by diminished player value.
Consolidated loss masked by the evaporated parachute payments.

Add in the rock bottom league place, and no wages for the players, and I'd say the state of the club is infinitely worse than 2001 or 2005. Full marks to you for the glass half full approach, but I'm not having it myself.

[BWFC_Insane]

Given the threat of administration seems to be real judging by what Iles is saying on the blog there is a serious point just raised on there.

IF Davies is seriously vetting prospective buyers to gauge their suitability for buying the club and funding it, then surely selling to one, even with limited funds is in the better interests of the club than letting it slip into administration and then have one of the parties buy it from that point.

To me it suggests this is more about Eddie getting his pound of flesh than worrying about the longer term health of the club.

I don't understand your logic jump from paragraph 2 to 3.

But then that's partly because I still believe that it's also in Eddie's interests not to regain 1p in the £1 via administration.

Well if the issue was that Eddie wasn't happy that consortium a) had enough funds to cover the running of the club and wouldn't sell to them for that reason, consortium a) could buy the club from the administrators anyway. At which point we'd have lost assets, points and probably any chance of a relatively smooth return to something approaching normality.

Even if a consortium is only able to partially support the club it would be better to sell to them than go into administration, surely?

However, the only way it might not be better is personally for ED if he would make more money via administration.

It is speculative but I cannot see how administration would be in the best interests over and above some sort of takeover.

[Worthy4England]

I am generally aware that Accounts don't always paint the accurate picture, but one which is good enough to satisfy the Auditor

The state of the Club now is we have less debt than when he took office if we can find a buyer
We have 200 additional management and admin staff
13 additional players
The asset value is broadly the same @ £45m - £47m
Consolidate P&L showed a loss of £6.4m last year and a loss of £8m in 2001

We had a problem in 2001 had ED not come along, we have a problem now that he's walking away...Don't think we had a solution then, we clearly don't have a solution now (albeit it's fairly clear that we needed to get more cost out than we have done)

When are you talking about? Since he was on the board or when he bought out the existing shareholders?

Is an additional 200 support staff really a good thing? I haven't seen much of an increase in the level of service as a "customer", and have they really earned their crust in our performance as a business?
13 more players - so what, if they're all crap.
Asset value - additional built asset value cancelled out by diminished player value.
Consolidated loss masked by the evaporated parachute payments.

Add in the rock bottom league place, and no wages for the players, and I'd say the state of the club is infinitely worse than 2001 or 2005. Full marks to you for the glass half full approach, but I'm not having it myself.

2001 he hadn't bought out the Club - which is why I used it

200+ additional support staff doesn't look like a good thing to me - how have we let that happen?
13 more shit players - we've signed that many this year - why, when we knew we were skint?
The asset value is tangible assets players are intangible.

So I agree with you on a number of things.

The point I'm making is, I think we could have been close to going bust when ED joined the board. We didn't because ED joined the board, we had some great years that I thought I'd never see. The situation for me is broadly similar now as then other than we don't have another ED lined up.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

...(our) players are intangible.

You're fxckin' correct on that score

[BWFC_Insane]

Nixon promising a story tomorrow about the criteria that need to be met and what the issue with meeting them are.

He says it will make things clearer.

[Enoch]

He's such a love.

[StaffsTrotter]

So come on then what do we reckon the criteria are
- lots of money and doesnt mind losing it and having 1000s of people telling them to spend more but keep us stable
- a long term plan/ commitment .at least to end of season
- a long standing fan/ connection with the club - evidence required
- nationality british
- rhino hide for brickbats
- above 5 foot 6 in their stockinged feet
- guarantee to get us back to PL in 2 years
- flamboyant/ unstable character - who wants really to be the manager
- must not change team name/ colour of shirts

[Lost Leopard Spot]

So come on then what do we reckon the criteria are
- lots of money and doesnt mind losing it and having 1000s of people telling them to spend more but keep us stable
- a long term plan/ commitment .at least to end of season
- a long standing fan/ connection with the club - evidence required
- nationality british
- rhino hide for brickbats
- above 5 foot 6 in their stockinged feet
- guarantee to get us back to PL in 2 years
- flamboyant/ unstable character - who wants really to be the manager
- must not change team name/ colour of shirts

1. Has a pallet of cash in used notes equalling thirty million pounds.
2. Will transfer pallet to an Isle of Man bank vault designated by Eddie in secure insured transport.
3. Acceptance of very long but written in tiny, tiny writing clause in the T&Cs regarding possible future repayment of the wiped out debt depending upon quite complex mathematical formula payable directly to ED or his heirs.
4. A box, for eternity, for the exclusive use of ED or his nominated visitors.

[StaffsTrotter]

So come on then what do we reckon the criteria are
- lots of money and doesnt mind losing it and having 1000s of people telling them to spend more but keep us stable
- a long term plan/ commitment .at least to end of season
- a long standing fan/ connection with the club - evidence required
- nationality british
- rhino hide for brickbats
- above 5 foot 6 in their stockinged feet
- guarantee to get us back to PL in 2 years
- flamboyant/ unstable character - who wants really to be the manager
- must not change team name/ colour of shirts

1. Has a pallet of cash in used notes equalling thirty million pounds.
2. Will transfer pallet to an Isle of Man bank vault designated by Eddie in secure insured transport.
3. Acceptance of very long but written in tiny, tiny writing clause in the T&Cs regarding possible future repayment of the wiped out debt depending upon quite complex mathematical formula payable directly to ED or his heirs.
4. A box, for eternity, for the exclusive use of ED or his nominated visitors.

Do you have such a low, cynical opinion of everybody or is it just ED ?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

So come on then what do we reckon the criteria are
- lots of money and doesnt mind losing it and having 1000s of people telling them to spend more but keep us stable
- a long term plan/ commitment .at least to end of season
- a long standing fan/ connection with the club - evidence required
- nationality british
- rhino hide for brickbats
- above 5 foot 6 in their stockinged feet
- guarantee to get us back to PL in 2 years
- flamboyant/ unstable character - who wants really to be the manager
- must not change team name/ colour of shirts

1. Has a pallet of cash in used notes equalling thirty million pounds.
2. Will transfer pallet to an Isle of Man bank vault designated by Eddie in secure insured transport.
3. Acceptance of very long but written in tiny, tiny writing clause in the T&Cs regarding possible future repayment of the wiped out debt depending upon quite complex mathematical formula payable directly to ED or his heirs.
4. A box, for eternity, for the exclusive use of ED or his nominated visitors.

Do you have such a low, cynical opinion of everybody or is it just ED ?

In what way is the above either low or cynical??? It appears a straightforward list of bare minimum requirements for a sale as opposed to an administration move.