The Debt.

[General Mannerheim]

is it just the players who are not getting paid or everybody else too? management, coaching staff, groundsmen, club shop and ticket office staff, tealady??

[Lost Leopard Spot]

is it just the players who are not getting paid or everybody else too? management, coaching staff, groundsmen, club shop and ticket office staff, tealady??

Everybody inc coaching staff were paid on the 20th
Players get paid on the 30th and weren't

[Worthy4England]

is it just the players who are not getting paid or everybody else too? management, coaching staff, groundsmen, club shop and ticket office staff, tealady??

I think the reports said first team players...

[thebish]

We are well and truly goosed.

yes - you have told us this a million times - over several years...

we're still here.

what possible rational reason do you have to mistrust Birch?

I don't mistrust him. But he's been here a week and is working primarily for Eddie.

yet you wrote (of Birch)

I don't trust Birch and seemingly there is an ulterior motive in play.

is there some subtle difference between "don't trust" and "mistrust" that I am missing?

[Worthy4England]

We are well and truly goosed.

yes - you have told us this a million times - over several years...

we're still here.

what possible rational reason do you have to mistrust Birch?

I don't mistrust him. But he's been here a week and is working primarily for Eddie.

yet you wrote (of Birch)

I don't trust Birch and seemingly there is an ulterior motive in play.

is there some subtle difference between "don't trust" and "mistrust" that I am missing?

Do you not trust BWFCi at his word???!!!

[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 ?

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.

Ha - using the Bish technique I see. Sorry I thought your criteria seemed to cast aspersions on Edwins motives and seemed a tad ungrateful. Obviously I mis-interpreted.

[twilight]

is it just the players who are not getting paid or everybody else too? management, coaching staff, groundsmen, club shop and ticket office staff, tealady??

I think the reports said first team players...

I could think of one or two good reasons for this

[thebish]

Ohhh Asset Stripping - which ones do we think are being stripped with the concrete evidence?

Our tangible assets from the last Accounts are:

1) Stadium £33m
2) Hotel £8.4m
3) Freehold Land £804k
4) Plant equipment and vehicles £4.5m

That's about it...I don't care much about the bottom 3...

there's that pen we used to have but could never find when it came to making those deadline signings... that must be worth a bit - unused??

[thebish]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

[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.

Ha - using the Bish technique I see. Sorry I thought your criteria seemed to cast aspersions on Edwins motives and seemed a tad ungrateful. Obviously I mis-interpreted.

(EDITED. Sorry answering two posts at once and fxcked up both...)
No, I wasn't being cynical. Won't claim I never am, but not on this occasion.

[bobo the clown]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

Yeah !!!

That methodology reminds me of someone. Who ? Who ??

[thebish]

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".

Maybe there is a simple explanation.

maybe the club HAS been trying to "line up further investment to secure our long term future" - but haven't found any. Just because summat hasn't happened doesn't mean that nobody has been trying to make it happen.

[thebish]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

Yeah !!!

That methodology reminds me of someone. Who ? Who ??

which opposites do you have in mind that I have claimed and then told-you-so'd? I'm sure you're not just making summat up! no... not your style at all! no! never!! never the once happened!

[bobo the clown]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

Yeah !!!

That methodology reminds me of someone. Who ? Who ??

which opposites do you have in mind that I have claimed and then told-you-so'd? I'm sure you're not just making summat up! no... not your style at all! no! never!! never the once happened!

Did I say you ? Did I, did I ??

Guilty conscience Vicar. Shall we have a vote ?

[StaffsTrotter]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

Yeah !!!

That methodology reminds me of someone. Who ? Who ??

which opposites do you have in mind that I have claimed and then told-you-so'd? I'm sure you're not just making summat up! no... not your style at all! no! never!! never the once happened!

Did I say you ? Did I, did I ??

Guilty conscience Vicar. Shall we have a vote ?

I smell petards being hoisted

[BWFC_Insane]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

Except not trusting someone can simply mean you haven't got enough evidence to put your trust in them yet.

It does not mean you have reason to mistrust.

I don't trust a random stranger who approaches me on the street. Neither do I mistrust him.

There is a distinction there.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

Except not trusting someone can simply mean you haven't got enough evidence to put your trust in them yet.

It does not mean you have reason to mistrust.

I don't trust a random stranger who approaches me on the street. Neither do I mistrust him.

There is a distinction there.

There isn't.

[Gudnib]

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.

How do you know what he neevr had? Sunday Times guessed he was worth £100million but they were guessing. The one thing Eddie is well known for its not courting media attention.

Chances are that the money realised from selling his shares in Strix was invested in something with better financial prospects than the £150million he has poured into BWFC (which grewto £173 million with rolled up interest that the club was never in a position to pay).

If you think that's doing well it would not be a good idea to take up financial advising as a career plan.

[thebish]

His latest musing re any takeover....(which is what I've been saying for a while now)

y'see - when you specialise in telling us opposites - then whatever happens you can later claim you said it ages ago...

in the space of less than a day you have clearly stated:

1. you don't trust Birch - he's here on a secret hidden dodgy agenda
2. you don't mistrust Birch

so - whatever happens - he turns out to have been trustworthy or not/on a secret hidden agenda or not - you can say "TOLD YOU SO!"

Except not trusting someone can simply mean you haven't got enough evidence to put your trust in them yet.

It does not mean you have reason to mistrust.

I don't trust a random stranger who approaches me on the street. Neither do I mistrust him.

There is a distinction there.

in the situation of not knowing someone well enough I suspect I might say something like... errrrr... "I don't really know the guy well enough" if I wanted to get across the idea that it was simply lack of information... I probably wouldn't try to get that across by saying "I don't trust him" - especially after claiming that summat dodgy was going on - cos - well - that actually sounds like you mean you don't trust him - especially if you also claim he has a hidden secret agenda...

[thebish]

Guilty conscience Vicar. Shall we have a vote ?

nahh - I'd sugest a couple of examples of what you're on about would suffice!