ED good memories or good riddence?

[BWFC_Insane]

^^Isn't just about signings. Had we changed manager in January it might have given us a chance.

Point is that the various delays mean there is now very little chance for anything to be changed that might make a big enough impact.

[midlands exile]

ED also presided over one of the most embarrassing implosions in football, with either one of the worst examples in the world of a meltdown of a football club or a level of book-cooking that wouldn't go amiss on Masterchef.

really???

looking at it objectively - what has ACTUALLY happened to us?

we have dropped down from the top 8 of the premiership - via a brief struggle with the bottom of the premiership - to the bottom of the championship
we have a less good squad
we've had a few duff managers
we don't have THAT much actual debt compared with others
we have a decent stadium
we've lost one of our two training grounds
we've changed owners

is that REALLY one of the worst examples of football club meltdown?? To me - it looks like a fairly common experience for football clubs. Look at most clubs in the championship and you could say very similar things...

On a journey from UEFA Cup qualifications to bottom of the second tier and almost certainly League 1, and trading the likes of Anelka in for Beckford etc, we managed to rack up the majority of an alleged £200m debt - one of the highest for any club in world football. My view is that alone is a textbook example of how not to run a football club. Maybe QPR are the only other club in the championship with anywhere near that level of financial stupidity, but I know plenty hold the view that they are a joke club too.

Unless the £200m debt wasn't real, and it was only recently that the losses started really hitting ED (i.e. the personal loan that he refused to wipe off), which would make it slightly less embarrassing - but then you have to start asking questions about the whole motives for running the club. Either way, add into the mix the threats of non-payment for players and staff, and the tax man banging on the door, and it's a poor show all round for stewardship of the club.

[thebish]

Eddie invested that money into a Premiership side. His initial investment was far less than Sports Shield have to put in. When Eddie invested the club weren't facing liquidation in a court.

He did invest in a Prem Side - one with £30+m debt and no major plan to pay it. His initial investment was less than SS - he didn't take over the Club with his initial investment. Facing liquidation is a bit like nearly pregnant - you're not, unless you are. When you're not, you're not. Who's to say that he couldn't/wouldn't have paid the main bills causing that at any time? Sometimes you play hardball.

Aye. And him playing hardball has harmed the football club. Which is my main irritation. I only care about Bolton Wanderers not Eddie Davies. The fact he reportedly changed the deal 8 times and only signed off on it at the last minute has harmed the club. We've lost assets, a training ground that was the envy of others and furthermore the delay has almost certainly
cost us a chance of staying in the championship.

what actual tangible evidence of that is there?

Well a) in April Wigan will move in.

b) see championship league table.

Relegation will reduce income by approx 5M. Another nice parting gift from Eddie to Sports Shield.

very amusing... what tangible evidence is there that Eddie's "playing hardball" caused any of that?

[thebish]

Eddie invested that money into a Premiership side. His initial investment was far less than Sports Shield have to put in. When Eddie invested the club weren't facing liquidation in a court.

He did invest in a Prem Side - one with £30+m debt and no major plan to pay it. His initial investment was less than SS - he didn't take over the Club with his initial investment. Facing liquidation is a bit like nearly pregnant - you're not, unless you are. When you're not, you're not. Who's to say that he couldn't/wouldn't have paid the main bills causing that at any time? Sometimes you play hardball.

Aye. And him playing hardball has harmed the football club. Which is my main irritation. I only care about Bolton Wanderers not Eddie Davies. The fact he reportedly changed the deal 8 times and only signed off on it at the last minute has harmed the club. We've lost assets, a training ground that was the envy of others and furthermore the delay has almost certainly cost us a chance of staying in the championship.

what actual tangible evidence of that is there?

As ever I think my own views fall in between these two, but taking so long to finalise a deal (hell even properly look at a sale...), running it so close to the wire before confirming, and refusing to pay staff don't exactly help his image or that of the club's. I do think that we wouldn't be in this situation if they'd properly started looking for a sale 12+ months ago.

why? because our players/manager would have been magically better somehow? not sure I understand this alleged direct correlation...

[thebish]

Unless the £200m debt wasn't real, and it was only recently that the losses started really hitting ED (i.e. the personal loan that he refused to wipe off), which would make it slightly less embarrassing - but then you have to start asking questions about the whole motives for running the club. Either way, add into the mix the threats of non-payment for players and staff, and the tax man banging on the door, and it's a poor show all round for stewardship of the club.

hmmm - saying that it's poor stewardship is not quite the same as describing our recent journey as "one of the worst examples in the world of a meltdown of a football club"!!

[thebish]

very amusing... what tangible evidence is there that Eddie's "playing hardball" caused any of that?

Playing devil's advocate, if he did play hardball to take control of the club then he likely acted that way during the sale too. Which, on speculation, could be why he seemingly changed his demands so often (and multiple consortia have said that now). People rarely change their personality or style of business in my experience, and that style of business rarely makes for a pleasant experience.

why? because our players/manager would have been magically better somehow? not sure I understand this alleged direct correlation...

See above comment - if he his style of business is indeed playing hardball, it could very well explain why it's been such a drawn out process to actually identify and eventually sell the club. All of these drawn out negotiations have gradually resulted in delayed staff payments and the selling of assets.

As I said I think my views lie between yours and Insanos. I think you both have valid points.

I was asking BWFC_Insane for tangible evidence that ED's playing hardball caused the selling of the training ground and our place at the bottom of the table, though... not a couple of I reckon's and a sprinkling of ifs!

(I'm not disputing that it was a drawn-out process - it clearly was - but we don't really know WHY it was - that's speculation....)

[midlands exile]

Eddie invested that money into a Premiership side. His initial investment was far less than Sports Shield have to put in. When Eddie invested the club weren't facing liquidation in a court.

He did invest in a Prem Side - one with £30+m debt and no major plan to pay it. His initial investment was less than SS - he didn't take over the Club with his initial investment. Facing liquidation is a bit like nearly pregnant - you're not, unless you are. When you're not, you're not. Who's to say that he couldn't/wouldn't have paid the main bills causing that at any time? Sometimes you play hardball.

Aye. And him playing hardball has harmed the football club. Which is my main irritation. I only care about Bolton Wanderers not Eddie Davies. The fact he reportedly changed the deal 8 times and only signed off on it at the last minute has harmed the club. We've lost assets, a training ground that was the envy of others and furthermore the delay has almost certainly cost us a chance of staying in the championship.

I do completely agree with this.... although Lennon is probably one of the most clueless, inept managers going and the players aren't blameless but the time its took Eddie Davies to sell the club has certainly harmed the club & is a major factor in our almost certain relegation to League 1.

But you have to remember, ED only wanted what was best for the club!

Nothing to do with him getting the best deal possible for himself.... Can't really argue with that in itself, it's his prerogative. But combined with the PR spin and nonsense that was coming from the club, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

[midlands exile]

Unless the £200m debt wasn't real, and it was only recently that the losses started really hitting ED (i.e. the personal loan that he refused to wipe off), which would make it slightly less embarrassing - but then you have to start asking questions about the whole motives for running the club. Either way, add into the mix the threats of non-payment for players and staff, and the tax man banging on the door, and it's a poor show all round for stewardship of the club.

hmmm - saying that it's poor stewardship is not quite the same as describing our recent journey as "one of the worst examples in the world of a meltdown of a football club"!!

Nice use of selective quotation! I'll paste the previous paragraph to help you find the key bit:
On a journey from UEFA Cup qualifications to bottom of the second tier and almost certainly League 1, and trading the likes of Anelka in for Beckford etc, we managed to rack up the majority of an alleged £200m debt - one of the highest for any club in world football. My view is that alone is a textbook example of how not to run a football club.

[Worthy4England]

ED also presided over one of the most embarrassing implosions in football, with either one of the worst examples in the world of a meltdown of a football club or a level of book-cooking that wouldn't go amiss on Masterchef.

really???

looking at it objectively - what has ACTUALLY happened to us?

we have dropped down from the top 8 of the premiership - via a brief struggle with the bottom of the premiership - to the bottom of the championship
we have a less good squad
we've had a few duff managers
we don't have THAT much actual debt compared with others
we have a decent stadium
we've lost one of our two training grounds
we've changed owners

is that REALLY one of the worst examples of football club meltdown?? To me - it looks like a fairly common experience for football clubs. Look at most clubs in the championship and you could say very similar things...

On a journey from UEFA Cup qualifications to bottom of the second tier and almost certainly League 1, and trading the likes of Anelka in for Beckford etc, we managed to rack up the majority of an alleged £200m debt - one of the highest for any club in world football. My view is that alone is a textbook example of how not to run a football club. Maybe QPR are the only other club in the championship with anywhere near that level of financial stupidity, but I know plenty hold the view that they are a joke club too.

Unless the £200m debt wasn't real, and it was only recently that the losses started really hitting ED (i.e. the personal loan that he refused to wipe off), which would make it slightly less embarrassing - but then you have to start asking questions about the whole motives for running the club. Either way, add into the mix the threats of non-payment for players and staff, and the tax man banging on the door, and it's a poor show all round for stewardship of the club.

Maybe ED decided that he could afford to lose a portion of his accumulated wealth each year for the 13 years it took to rack up the debt? Bit like a smaller scale Abramovich. If you think that Chelsea, City are better run then you need to go look at your text book again. Their owners just have deeper pockets.

It was always said that the debt wasn't "real" in the sense we'd ever have to pay it back. Clearly we haven't paid most of it back.

In my 50 years on the planet, UEFA Cup qualification has happened a couple of times - that's an outlier. We've spent the majority of the last half a century not in the top flight - 39 years out of 51, we've spent about a third of my lifetime in the 3rd/4th Divisions (15 years out of 51) - we've not spent very long qualifying for the UEFA Cup. Perhaps folks need to reset their expectations somewhat. Don't get me wrong, it should be a piece of piss to get back into the UEFA Cup coz it's not as if anyone was bankrolling us last time around, is it?

[BWFC_Insane]

Yes. Eddie took over Bolton Wanderers as a premiership club with under 40M debt. How much did he buy it for?

He leaves it an almost certain league one club with debts as of today over £200M. Yes he is going to wipe off most of that. But the point remains. Eddie got a far better deal than sports shield are getting.

[midlands exile]

I was asking BWFC_Insane for tangible evidence that ED's playing hardball caused the selling of the training ground and our place at the bottom of the table, though... not a couple of I reckon's and a sprinkling of ifs!

(I'm not disputing that it was a drawn-out process - it clearly was - but we don't really know WHY it was - that's speculation....)

As I said I can see both of your points, and think that the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

One thing I agree with Insane on is that it's ED's inaction that has caused the sale of assets and our current position in the league (although the latter is shared with NL through poor signings). As someone else (possibly you?) said elsewhere, the signs have been there that he's wanted out for a few seasons; and PG was looking for "further investment" for at least a season or two. We've seen fewer and fewer resources available to the club, to the point where he didn't pay ongoing costs or overheads. That is absolutely unacceptable in my opinion, and begs the question "if stopping of funding entirely was due imminently, why the feck was it left so late to properly search for a sale?".

My beef with ED lies purely in his inaction, and slow decision making. He didn't fully decide that he wanted to sell the club until it was literally almost too late.

If we can find a buyer for the club when we're in the position we're in (both on and off the field), but couldn't when we were in the prem or just missing out on the play offs, it makes you wonder what kind of demands ED was making to prospective buyers back then.

[thebish]

Yes. Eddie took over Bolton Wanderers as a premiership club with under 40M debt. How much did he buy it for?

He leaves it an almost certain league one club with debts as of today over £200M. Yes he is going to wipe off most of that. But the point remains. Eddie got a far better deal than sports shield are getting.

even if he did - which is purely a matter of speculation and subjective judgement - is this what it boils down to?? some kind of grudge that many years ago ED might have swung a better deal than SS did? who cares???

[Worthy4England]

Yes. Eddie took over Bolton Wanderers as a premiership club with under 40M debt. How much did he buy it for?

He leaves it an almost certain league one club with debts as of today over £200M. Yes he is going to wipe off most of that. But the point remains. Eddie got a far better deal than sports shield are getting.

You chug along and come back and tell me - you seem to know it's less than SS put up. Which by varying Accounts was £1...£7.5m....£15m..then I'll happily share with you what I think the figure was and why.

Being a Premiership Club has no direct connection with BWFC's ability to manage the debt it had (It might have more Revenue than a Champ Club but that's no indication of it's ability to pay).

[BWFC_Insane]

Yes. Eddie took over Bolton Wanderers as a premiership club with under 40M debt. How much did he buy it for?

He leaves it an almost certain league one club with debts as of today over £200M. Yes he is going to wipe off most of that. But the point remains. Eddie got a far better deal than sports shield are getting.

even if he did - which is purely a matter of speculation and subjective judgement - is this what it boils down to?? some kind of grudge that many years ago ED might have swung a better deal than SS did? who cares???

No. It is about the state he's left the club in. I only care about BWFC. If you care about Eddie then fine. But doesn't change what has happened the last few months. And the bottom line as to where the club is. As a season ticket holder going every Saturday what I care about is the team on the pitch and the likely future of that. That is why this process where Eddie has delayed until the last minute has harmed both the current and future. Of that I am 100% certain.

[Worthy4England]

Of that I am 100% certain.

Of that, I'm shocked. No, really.

[midlands exile]

Maybe ED decided that he could afford to lose a portion of his accumulated wealth each year for the 13 years it took to rack up the debt? Bit like a smaller scale Abramovich. If you think that Chelsea, City are better run then you need to go look at your text book again. Their owners just have deeper pockets.

It was always said that the debt wasn't "real" in the sense we'd ever have to pay it back. Clearly we haven't paid most of it back.

In my 50 years on the planet, UEFA Cup qualification has happened a couple of times - that's an outlier. We've spent the majority of the last half a century not in the top flight - 39 years out of 51, we've spent about a third of my lifetime in the 3rd/4th Divisions (15 years out of 51) - we've not spent very long qualifying for the UEFA Cup. Perhaps folks need to reset their expectations somewhat. Don't get me wrong, it should be a piece of piss to get back into the UEFA Cup coz it's not as if anyone was bankrolling us last time around, is it?

So I need to reset my expectations, and think that developing one of the highest (reported) debts in world football whilst sinking like a stone is acceptable? And I should shut my cake-hole instead of saying that is an embarrassing meltdown?

That said, I still don't believe for a second that the debt figures were any more credible than Starbucks stated P&L in the UK, which might make ED and PG's financial incompetence seems less severe - thus transforming my view from embarrassing meltdown to embarrassing mismanagement.

[thebish]

Yes. Eddie took over Bolton Wanderers as a premiership club with under 40M debt. How much did he buy it for?

He leaves it an almost certain league one club with debts as of today over £200M. Yes he is going to wipe off most of that. But the point remains. Eddie got a far better deal than sports shield are getting.

even if he did - which is purely a matter of speculation and subjective judgement - is this what it boils down to?? some kind of grudge that many years ago ED might have swung a better deal than SS did? who cares???

No. It is about the state he's left the club in. I only care about BWFC. If you care about Eddie then fine. But doesn't change what has happened the last few months. And the bottom line as to where the club is. As a season ticket holder going every Saturday what I care about is the team on the pitch and the likely future of that. That is why this process where Eddie has delayed until the last minute has harmed both the current and future. Of that I am 100% certain.

you say "that is why" - but AGAIN offer no tangible evidence at all of the causal link you claim between our position in the league and ED's delay in selling or between the sale of the training ground and ED's delay in selling...

you may well be 100% certain - you are rarely anything less! - but that doesn't mean you have shown it is true.

here's another scenario... ED sells 9 months ago - wanting to do the deal quickly - but sells to a right tossbag of a shonky consortium who then fleece us to next Thursday and back - and you turn up on here all dead certain - 100% certain, indeed - that ED has just got haphazardly got shut of the club with no care for its future and buggered off the the Bahamas.

in truth you have NO IDEA why the process has taken so long. Deano says: "“Eddie cares about the club but a lot of people have said detrimental things. He has put a hell of a lot of finance into that club."

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

we have dropped down from the top 8 of the premiership - via a brief struggle with the bottom of the premiership - to the bottom of the championship

Small quibble: wasn't a brief struggle. Our latest top-flight odyssey started with two seasons fighting relegation (16th then 17th), then four seasons in the top eight (8-6-8-7), then four lower-table ones (16-13-14-14), then we dropped in 18th. You could argue that Coyle's first full season wasn't a struggle with relegation – we were sixth in March, eighth in April – but the other post-Allardyce seasons certainly involved peril for some if not all of the campaign.

So if it was a brief struggle, it was a brief moment in the sun too. And for comparison, four seasons also seems set to to be the length of time we'll spend drifting down through this division, too (7-14-18-24?).

Last time we were on a long-term slide, in the 80s, we took three years to drop through this division (18-19-22), then four through Division Three (10-17-18-21). After dipping into Division Four for a single season, we spent five years in Division Three (10-6-4-13-2) and two in Division Two (14-3). From 1995 to 2013 we were always in the nation's top 30.

[thebish]

we have dropped down from the top 8 of the premiership - via a brief struggle with the bottom of the premiership - to the bottom of the championship

Small quibble: wasn't a brief struggle. Our latest top-flight odyssey started with two seasons fighting relegation (16th then 17th), then four seasons in the top eight (8-6-8-7), then four lower-table ones (16-13-14-14), then we dropped in 18th. You could argue that Coyle's first full season wasn't a struggle with relegation – we were sixth in March, eighth in April – but the other post-Allardyce seasons certainly involved peril for some if not all of the campaign.

So if it was a brief struggle, it was a brief moment in the sun too. And for comparison, four seasons also seems set to to be the length of time we'll spend drifting down through this division, too (7-14-18-24?).

Last time we were on a long-term slide, in the 80s, we took three years to drop through this division (18-19-22), then four through Division Three (10-17-18-21). After dipping into Division Four for a single season, we spent five years in Division Three (10-6-4-13-2) and two in Division Two (14-3). From 1995 to 2013 we were always in the nation's top 30.

small quibbles are the best kind of quibble!

[Worthy4England]

Maybe ED decided that he could afford to lose a portion of his accumulated wealth each year for the 13 years it took to rack up the debt? Bit like a smaller scale Abramovich. If you think that Chelsea, City are better run then you need to go look at your text book again. Their owners just have deeper pockets.

It was always said that the debt wasn't "real" in the sense we'd ever have to pay it back. Clearly we haven't paid most of it back.

In my 50 years on the planet, UEFA Cup qualification has happened a couple of times - that's an outlier. We've spent the majority of the last half a century not in the top flight - 39 years out of 51, we've spent about a third of my lifetime in the 3rd/4th Divisions (15 years out of 51) - we've not spent very long qualifying for the UEFA Cup. Perhaps folks need to reset their expectations somewhat. Don't get me wrong, it should be a piece of piss to get back into the UEFA Cup coz it's not as if anyone was bankrolling us last time around, is it?

So I need to reset my expectations, and think that developing one of the highest (reported) debts in world football whilst sinking like a stone is acceptable? And I should shut my cake-hole instead of saying that is an embarrassing meltdown?

That said, I still don't believe for a second that the debt figures were any more credible than Starbucks stated P&L in the UK, which might make ED and PG's financial incompetence seems less severe - thus transforming my view from embarrassing meltdown to embarrassing mismanagement.

Do what you want fella - your life.

I'm just laying out where BWFC have been during mine. Maybe you want to put £xm into a football club with little prospect of getting it back - some people do you know? I'll be delighted if you do - I won't even ask you to run it properly as long as it gets into Europe - you can make the debt whatever you can afford to as long as you take most of it with you...

I am of the opinion that there's been far greater meltdowns - given that whether the debt was £10m, £100m, or £500m, it's only debt until someone pays it or you go bankrupt/into Admin etc. If neither those two options need to occur then you're just servicing it. We've not done the latter - gone into Admin- it's been paid off in large part - even if there were some still hanging around (which I don't think anyone's sure of yet).

Surely having a debt of £1m, not being able to pay it and going into Admin is more embarrassing than having a debt of £200m, not being in Admin and paying it off?