The breaking News thread...

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

The image, in case you're work-blocked:

I suspect there's an awful lot of overhang of wage budget through each manager Megson-Coyle-Freedman-Lennon (I exclude Lee as he appears, on the face of it, to have been given f*ck all) as each would have been promised to get some new blood in probably in exchange for agreeing over their tenure to reduce.

Lee brought in about eight or nine players, didn't he? Including Braaten and Wilhelmsson, who wouldn't have been cheap, plus the controversial McCann deal.

But yeah: each manager has to work with his predecessor's purchases, on ling contracts. Some are better at it than others.

[Worthy4England]

Each or collectively?

Each.

So where does our wage budget now sit re the rest of the division (does this data even exist?)? And where our theoretical finishing position, based on financial wherewithal, should be?

I'd be interested to see how tough a time of it Lennon has actually had (admittedly, finance doesn't automatically = position, but you get the crux).


I suspect there's an awful lot of overhang of wage budget through each manager Megson-Coyle-Freedman-Lennon (I exclude Lee as he appears, on the face of it, to have been given f*ck all) as each would have been promised to get some new blood in probably in exchange for agreeing over their tenure to reduce. I'm presuming that's a large part of why so many are out of contract this summer. Only the second half of the deal, "you can then reinvest in your own" is a little bit of an empty promise right now.

The latest collated figures I can find relate to the numbers in the Club's Accounts to the end June 2014 (we haven't submitted Accounts since then)..



We reported in the press that we were nearer £16/£17m for year ended 2015 no idea if that's true or not and there have been suggestions that we're now heading towards £10/£11m currently...Nixon's figures are £6.8 with only half a squad, but I presume the most expensive half...

[BWFC_Insane]

^^numbers in the accounts include the younger players and permanent reserves etc...

I suspect we are still around the 15M mark.

[Worthy4England]

^^numbers in the accounts include the younger players and permanent reserves etc...

I suspect we are still around the 15M mark.

Not according to your mate Iles from a week ago...He couldn't be wrong could he?

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/bol ... ers_today/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

£10m he says. There is another £10m allegedly on "non-playing staff, services and so-called corporate costs"

[thebish]

to have dropped from £26.6million to £11million in 2 or 3 years is quite a decent stab at getting the wage bill down!

[BWFC_Insane]

^^numbers in the accounts include the younger players and permanent reserves etc...

I suspect we are still around the 15M mark.

Not according to your mate Iles from a week ago...He couldn't be wrong could he?

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/bol ... ers_today/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

£10m he says. There is another £10m allegedly on "non-playing staff, services and so-called corporate costs"

We were 16M as of September according to Iles at the time. I suppose we released a few but even then presumably we are still having to pay some of their wages.

Whatever way you look at us hard to see what sports shield find appealing at the minute.

[Peter Thompson]

The image, in case you're work-blocked:

I suspect there's an awful lot of overhang of wage budget through each manager Megson-Coyle-Freedman-Lennon (I exclude Lee as he appears, on the face of it, to have been given f*ck all) as each would have been promised to get some new blood in probably in exchange for agreeing over their tenure to reduce.

Lee brought in about eight or nine players, didn't he? Including Braaten and Wilhelmsson, who wouldn't have been cheap, plus the controversial McCann deal.

But yeah: each manager has to work with his predecessor's purchases, on ling contracts. Some are better at it than others.

How many of these where signed by Lennon

I make it Amos, Madine, Heskey, Osede, Dobbie + he renewed Pratley's contract - approx £60k per week for 6 players (if the numbers are true)

[Worthy4England]

^^numbers in the accounts include the younger players and permanent reserves etc...

I suspect we are still around the 15M mark.

Not according to your mate Iles from a week ago...He couldn't be wrong could he?

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/bol ... ers_today/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

£10m he says. There is another £10m allegedly on "non-playing staff, services and so-called corporate costs"

We were 16M as of September according to Iles at the time. I suppose we released a few but even then presumably we are still having to pay some of their wages.

Whatever way you look at us hard to see what sports shield find appealing at the minute.

I'm only quoting the same source you use, when it suits your sense of blame.

Assuming you can get over the hurdle of why anyone would want to own a football club, it's not that hard to see. If (and that's a big if) ED left us with £15m debt, that would be one of the lowest debt positions in the Championship. 16th out of 24. If he left us with £30m which is still lower than when he arrived, we'd still be in the bottom half...if it was only £7.5m we'd be in the bottom 5 debt positions...

[Lord Kangana]

Interesting.

Do we know what our current position is, or has the deal still to be finalised?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

^^numbers in the accounts include the younger players and permanent reserves etc...

I suspect we are still around the 15M mark.

Not according to your mate Iles from a week ago...He couldn't be wrong could he?

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/bol ... ers_today/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

£10m he says. There is another £10m allegedly on "non-playing staff, services and so-called corporate costs"

We were 16M as of September according to Iles at the time. I suppose we released a few but even then presumably we are still having to pay some of their wages.

Whatever way you look at us hard to see what sports shield find appealing at the minute.

I'm only quoting the same source you use, when it suits your sense of blame.

Assuming you can get over the hurdle of why anyone would want to own a football club, it's not that hard to see. If (and that's a big if) ED left us with £15m debt, that would be one of the lowest debt positions in the Championship. 16th out of 24. If he left us with £30m which is still lower than when he arrived, we'd still be in the bottom half...if it was only £7.5m we'd be in the bottom 5 debt positions...

When you say bottom, you mean top as in best. We'd be in the top 5 debt positions...

[Worthy4England]

Interesting.

Do we know what our current position is, or has the deal still to be finalised?

Bit difficult to tell really. As I understand it, the deal is complete and signed between us and SS, subject to FL ratification. What the actual figures are, I suspect might half surface in a couple of seasons...I don't believe there are ongoing negotiations between BWFC and SS.

So SS own us, any bills to pay are theirs, I'm not sure what any back-out position might look like, should SS not be able to convince the FL...I guess there's some sort of transfer back agreement.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I find it interesting that these wage figures are suddenly in the public domain. Feels like someone has an agenda.

I'd find it potentially off-putting as a player.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Interesting.

Do we know what our current position is, or has the deal still to be finalised?

Bit difficult to tell really. As I understand it, the deal is complete and signed between us and SS, subject to FL ratification. What the actual figures are, I suspect might half surface in a couple of seasons...I don't believe there are ongoing negotiations between BWFC and SS.

So SS own us, any bills to pay are theirs, I'm not sure what any back-out position might look like, should SS not be able to convince the FL...I guess there's some sort of transfer back agreement.

It's a share purchase agreement. I wouuld think it has a clause in it which states that it comes into operation once the FL ratification is complete. I would think until then we are still owned by ED.

[Lord Kangana]

So it's a bit pointless passing judgement on ED's reign until such information is available then.

And it would offer a whole new perspective if he left us so relatively debt free. Despite the turmoil.

[Worthy4England]

Interesting.

Do we know what our current position is, or has the deal still to be finalised?

Bit difficult to tell really. As I understand it, the deal is complete and signed between us and SS, subject to FL ratification. What the actual figures are, I suspect might half surface in a couple of seasons...I don't believe there are ongoing negotiations between BWFC and SS.

So SS own us, any bills to pay are theirs, I'm not sure what any back-out position might look like, should SS not be able to convince the FL...I guess there's some sort of transfer back agreement.

It's a share purchase agreement. I wouuld think it has a clause in it which states that it comes into operation once the FL ratification is complete. I would think until then we are still owned by ED.

I'd normally agree, but I thought I'd read somewhere they'd actually enacted the transfer...which wouldn't make much sense...

[StaffsTrotter]

I find it interesting that these wage figures are suddenly in the public domain. Feels like someone has an agenda.

I'd find it potentially off-putting as a player.

same thought immediately went through my mind - wont exactly help just at a time when players need to pull together

[thebish]

with that Sun article - surely a HELPFUL thing to do would have been to provide some context? Like we have had to do for ourselves - the wage bills of other lower-championship clubs... the wage bills of promotion-hopeful div.1 clubs...

lots of numbers look BIG without context - but to know if they are BIG or not - you need to see what's normal!! (like all those "Government spends £XXXXXmillion per day on YYYYYY!!!" - often SOUNDS big - but in the context of Govt. Spending and a nation to spend it on - it turns out to be not that big!)

[Lord Kangana]

I went to a lecture given by a guy (the head guy that is, from Cambridge Uni and everything) who compiles all the data for government. He said, in essence, that most of what you read in the papers is a load of old shite, as it's either the paper's agenda or the current stripe of government's agenda of very select data that you're reading. So there.

[Worthy4England]

I went to a lecture given by a guy (the head guy that is, from Cambridge Uni and everything) who compiles all the data for government. He said, in essence, that most of what you read in the papers is a load of old shite, as it's either the paper's agenda or the current stripe of government's agenda of very select data that you're reading. So there.

Indeed - unless you have the facts, you don't have the facts - you're just going off someone's interpretation of truths and half truths..and there's always an agenda even if it's fairly neutral...

[CrazyHorse]

So to summarise, Nixon talks a load of old bollocks.