Jump to content
IGNORED

Bolton Finances (Merged)


Ska Junkie

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Ska Junkie said:

Didn't they sell their training ground to Wigan last year? It seems to be a case of a bit of both Mr P. The owner wants to sell and invest as little as possible to cover debts / existing contracts and seems happy to sell whatever he can to avoid putting any £££ in.

Their historical debt was enormous IIRC. 

Personally, when their owner at the time wanted to 'pull up the bridge between the EPL and the EFL' a few years ago, I lost any respect for Bolton. A case of 'we're alright, stuff you'. 

Me too mate. Garside wasn't it ? To be fair he got short shrift from the media and even we got a mention.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1226177/MARTIN-SAMUEL-One-problem-franchise-idea-Phil-Gartside-No-place-Bolton.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Gasbuster said:

Seeing that they went into administration just a few years ago (and have clearly not learnt from it), maybe a bigger points deduction is justified ?

I'd say that he's half expecting a bigger points deduction to be a real possibility given his use of the phrase "minimum immediate points deduction of 12 points."

The reality of it is that it needs to be bigger.  Clubs won't learn if they're given a chance.  For me, a second administration should result in immediate points deduction and a demotion at the end of that season from whatever league they end in (i.e. if they survive then league one, if not then down to league two).  A third should see them expelled from the league.

Same punishment should happen for punching police horses.....!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Me too mate. Garside wasn't it ? To be fair he got short shrift from the media and even we got a mention.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1226177/MARTIN-SAMUEL-One-problem-franchise-idea-Phil-Gartside-No-place-Bolton.html

What a good article that is! Thanks LP.

2 minutes ago, Steve Watts said:

I'd say that he's half expecting a bigger points deduction to be a real possibility given his use of the phrase "minimum immediate points deduction of 12 points."

The reality of it is that it needs to be bigger.  Clubs won't learn if they're given a chance.  For me, a second administration should result in immediate points deduction and a demotion at the end of that season from whatever league they end in (i.e. if they survive then league one, if not then down to league two).  A third should see them expelled from the league.

Same punishment should happen for punching police horses.....!

IIRC, weren't Luton shafted with -30 for going into admin twice? See ya Bolton! 👋

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weren’t there rumours about players not being paid late last year. Mark Little is there isn’t he. Alby jumped ship after scoring the goal which kept them up. See there is a job on their site for a retail assistant, can they employ anyone? But I guess if they can’t sell their shirts etc they won’t have money coming in?

Got to feel a tiny bit for Bolton though, they seem to be the first big name of late who are going to suffer. I personally would have liked to see Villa, Forest, Brum etc feel the pinch more than them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RedM said:

Weren’t there rumours about players not being paid late last year. Mark Little is there isn’t he. Alby jumped ship after scoring the goal which kept them up. See there is a job on their site for a retail assistant, can they employ anyone? But I guess if they can’t sell their shirts etc they won’t have money coming in?

Got to feel a tiny bit for Bolton though, they seem to be the first big name of late who are going to suffer. I personally would have liked to see Villa, Forest, Brum etc feel the pinch more than them. 

I honestly don't.  How many chances should someone get before they learn?  They even had Pompey go before them to show them what could happen if they don't get their shit together.  I agree that I'd like the others to get done as well, but it's got to start somewhere, and someone not learning the lesson deserves to get hit for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Steve Watts said:

 I think they were.  Weren't Bournemouth as well?  If they come down and are hit with that fine they could be in huge trouble.

Thought Bournemouth agreed their negotiated settlement- though admittedly the EFL will be waiting for them- can they be effectively punished twice for the same offence though? i.e. the breach in 14/15.

Their finances seem to have been a surprisingly tightly run ship in PL. However the fall in revenue is enormous on relegation.

To add, on the Bolton thing- would add they have learnt the lessons a bit tbh. According to their accounts, between 2014/15 to 2016/17 they slashed the wage bill from £26.5m to £12.6m- or a fall of 52.45%, or more precisely,- £26.5m to £18.5m to £12.6m- i.e. 30.18% reduction in 15/16 which was then further slashed by 31.89% in 16/17. No figures for last, let alone this season. It's historic overhang of debt I reckon.

@Ska Junkie Didn't know that about £2m transfer- assumed they were under an embargo in terms of payable fees, unless that got removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Steve Watts said:

I honestly don't.  How many chances should someone get before they learn?  They even had Pompey go before them to show them what could happen if they don't get their shit together.  I agree that I'd like the others to get done as well, but it's got to start somewhere, and someone not learning the lesson deserves to get hit for it.

I can see your point and agree with it, but it does seem the playing field is not as level as it should be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

To add, on the Bolton thing- would add they have learnt the lessons a bit tbh. According to their accounts, between 2014/15 to 2016/17 they slashed the wage bill from £26.5m to £12.6m- or a fall of 52.45%, or more precisely,- £26.5m to £18.5m to £12.6m- i.e. 30.18% reduction in 15/16 which was then further slashed by 31.89% in 16/17. No figures for last, let alone this season. It's historic overhang of debt I reckon.

 

Relegation and a 2 year transfer embargo probably had a lot to do with that, mind.  

 

Not sure about Bournemouth to be honest.  You're probably right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ska Junkie said:

Spot on Mr P but they've agreed a £2M fee for Christian Doige in January as part of a loan deal. What on earth happens with that now? :dunno:

£2m for a striker that’s never played above League 2? That’s ridiculous!

I assumed they went for him as a bit of a gamble but at £2m, that’s a huge gamble, especially for someone in the financial predicament that Bolton are & let’s not pretend that Bolton wouldn’t of been aware of what was going on! FGR must be fearing the worst right now & it’s not like they can ill afford to lose such sums when you take into account budgets etc.

Surely this will mean other clubs would be more than a little dubious about dealing with them again & it’ll mean Bolton having to pay up front for future players. That being said, surely their future must be in doubt as their current players will want out & they’ll obviously struggle to bring anyone new in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Have a read of this - read the whole thread, not just the initial tweet

 

One interesting bit I noted from that, was that their hotel lost £10k per week- part of Burnden Leisure as was I believe, unsure what it's called now.

The line 'Bolton’s situation not helped by the hotel losing £10,000 a week too, shows that diversification not always the solution for a club'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Oh yeah Ska, a huge historic debt- well remembered too about the PL2 thing- you pointing that out put them down in my estimation now. Still no transfer fee spent for 2 years, moderate losses (said in the article they lost £6m in 16/17 and may have made a small profit last season owing to Madine sale)- guess it shows FFP and financing are definitively different.  As I say though, from the outside since their virtual bankruptcy in 2015, it appeared they were acting in a fairly restrained manner.

@Ashtonwurzel Sheffield Wednesday may well be. Derby? Not sure- Mel Morris is happy to foot the bill, he's a Derby fan after all and he's quite rich- plus they have sold players including the high earning Vydra this summer- should be alright IMO but probably have to be restrained in transfers moving forward, or sell big for FFP purposes.

More problems at Derby that have been made public but yes you could well be right that they can wheel and deal and slash the wage bill to avoid doing a "Bolton".

Norwich not in great shape either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ashtonwurzel said:

More problems at Derby that have been made public but yes you could well be right that they can wheel and deal and slash the wage bill to avoid doing a "Bolton".

Norwich not in great shape either.

Are we talking in financial terms, or an FFP sense?

The two can certainly be different things- have the money to pay debt or losses from the board, but not necessarily making low enough losses to avoid FFP. Far as I can see, Bolton are FFP fine- but the problem is financing. Whereas with Villa it's vice-versa!

Probably plenty of clubs somewhere in between too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Given they seem to have run- or at least tried to run- a fairly tight ship in the last 2 seasons the  this, that surprises me slightly but I don't doubt it!

Asset stripping or huge historic debts catching up with them?

Looking at their signings this season, it is close to 20 players as far as I can tell, ok only £225,000 paid in transfer fees but the likes of Gary Neil and several other senior pros have not signed as an act of charity that's for sure.

Absolutely not a shred of sympathy from me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Looking at their signings this season, it is close to 20 players as far as I can tell, ok only £225,000 paid in transfer fees but the likes of Gary Neil and several other senior pros have not signed as an act of charity that's for sure.

Absolutely not a shred of sympathy from me.

 

Depends whether you measure it by FFP or standard finances. They also released a lot of players in summer, though yeah O'Neil wouldn't have come cheap and am surprised they made some of the signings they did. In FFP terms over 3 years though, they are pretty compliant IMO.

Most of their issues now come from historic mismanagement IMO, as opposed to their current management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Depends whether you measure it by FFP or standard finances. They also released a lot of players in summer, though yeah O'Neil wouldn't have come cheap and am surprised they made some of the signings they did. In FFP terms over 3 years though, they are pretty compliant IMO.

Most of their issues now come from historic mismanagement IMO, as opposed to their current management.

I feel sorry for Forest Green in all this!

If the admin happens, no way that the Doidge fee gets sanctioned/paid, so yep, he probably ends up back with them. In the meantime FGR have been without their best player for half the season for no benefit, and unless he has a very good half season with Bolton, they’re unlikely to realise the same fee as people will know he can/can’t do it at championship level.

If they had any inkling that admin was a possibility and still went into a loan to buy agreement, possibly shafting a small club, the current owners are as bad as the past ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I feel sorry for Forest Green in all this!

If the admin happens, no way that the Doidge fee gets sanctioned/paid, so yep, he probably ends up back with them. In the meantime FGR have been without their best player for half the season for no benefit, and unless he has a very good half season with Bolton, they’re unlikely to realise the same fee as people will know he can/can’t do it at championship level.

If they had any inkling that admin was a possibility and still went into a loan to buy agreement, possibly shafting a small club, the current owners are as bad as the past ones

Agreed, Forest Green lose out fairly big here.

Bolton should if they go into admin, be duty bound to send him back- and perhaps other loanees too, depending on circs. Especially him however, because as you say Forest Green lose their best player for half a season, with no discernible benefit and value likely to decrease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Gasbuster said:

Seeing that they went into administration just a few years ago (and have clearly not learnt from it), maybe a bigger points deduction is justified ?

probably justified, though can't help but feel in SOME cases it's like kicking a man when their down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I feel sorry for Forest Green in all this!

If the admin happens, no way that the Doidge fee gets sanctioned/paid, so yep, he probably ends up back with them. In the meantime FGR have been without their best player for half the season for no benefit, and unless he has a very good half season with Bolton, they’re unlikely to realise the same fee as people will know he can/can’t do it at championship level.

If they had any inkling that admin was a possibility and still went into a loan to buy agreement, possibly shafting a small club, the current owners are as bad as the past ones

Would they though?

I thought there was some sort of football creditors agreement that meant clubs were a priority if things went tits up financially?

Suppose it depends on how the loan to buy contract was written.

Could work well for FGR if that player bangs them in for fun in the Championship and then goes back as they might get a better price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It goes like this in terms of FGR and potential loan.

The loan market is as follows:

  • Dry loan- that's a loan for a given period with an option of recall. No option to buy, just a straight loan and the host club can recall.
  • Dry loan with no option of recall- as above but no option of recall. No option to buy, just a straight loan but the host club cannot recall
  • Loan with option to buy- Loan, then the club who has the player on loan has the choice to buy or not. The choice is with the club, so the club who loans out can have no realistic expectation or budgeting for a purchase.
  • Loan with obligation to buy- the club who loans the player is contractually obligated to buy. The problem then, short of the purchasing club facing bankruptcy, falls to the club who acquired the player on loan.

The last scenario is one in which Forest Green or indeed Bolton need to be worried, the others nothing ventured, nothing gained contractually speaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...