Jump to content
IGNORED

Bolton / Bury On The Brink (Merged)

Judda

By Judda
in Football Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

RUSSEL85

RUSSEL85

Posted
Posted

Always have mixed feelings about this. Some (not all) supporters are only happy when owners sink massive sums into clubs to make them into contenders, and the risk is always that a business will fail as everyone has their limits.   Supporters need to understand a club has to live within its means, owners need to realise the role of the club in the community and the EFL needs to be able to regulate properly. Players and their managers also need to take a look at how much they are taking out of the game.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allyolly

allyolly

Posted
Posted

So sad when you think of the obscene amounts of money just down the road in Manchester and so many lower league clubs are on the brink of not being able to survive. 

Enjoyed some good times at Gigg Lane. Hopefully for the sake of their fans even if it’s a long road there will be a road back for Bury FC. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robin1988

Robin1988

Posted
Posted

One of English football’s darkest days in a long time.

I hope they somehow comeback strong. There’s a lot of people with some big questions to answer but do any of us have any faith that they actually will?

Bury’s players are now out of pocket, the same players who won them promotion last season, I just hope they get picked up by other clubs.

Spare a thought for David Flitcroft and Mansfield too. Sacked after missing out on promotion on the final day, with one of the teams going up in their place going out of business before they played a fixture in the league above. Such a cruel irony.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted

What does Steve Dale now stand to gain?  That’s the bit I’m keen to understand.  Was it predominantly Stewart Day that caused the problems.

How much money has he put in?  Other than his £1?  Has he lost anything?

He told Jim White that he’d put up security with the PFA, so that they would pay some of players wages.  Is this true?

The CVA was allegedly agreed because the creditors agreed to 25p in the £.  Yet stories that the creditors was connected to him and paid £70k for £7m debt, which would be worth £1.75m at 25p/£..

If this is true, I suspect he’s a worried man.

I hope the truth comes out.

5 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

One of English football’s darkest days in a long time.

I hope they somehow comeback strong. There’s a lot of people with some big questions to answer but do any of us have any faith that they actually will?

Bury’s players are now out of pocket, the same players who won them promotion last season, I just hope they get picked up by other clubs.

Spare a thought for David Flitcroft and Mansfield too. Sacked after missing out on promotion on the final day, with one of the teams going up in their place going out of business before they played a fixture in the league above. Such a cruel irony.

Newport losing in play-offs too.

Notts County and Yeovil going out of the league.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Midlands Robin

Midlands Robin

Posted
Posted

If enough of the club can be saved they will start again at the bottom and work their way back up. 

There are several success stories of clubs that have eventually made it back from the depths of despair. They may not be back in the league for 10 years but I'm sure the supporters will reserect something of their club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bcfc01

bcfc01

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Offside said:

Very sad to hear that Bury have been expelled. A proud club with a long history. I feel very sorry for their loyal supporters. 

A very long history.

Won the FA twice cup beating Southampton 4-0 in 1900 and Derby 6-0 in 1903 and one of the earliest football league clubs having been a continuous member for 125 years (including war years). 

A really sad day.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
the1stknowle

the1stknowle

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

One of English football’s darkest days in a long time.

I hope they somehow comeback strong. There’s a lot of people with some big questions to answer but do any of us have any faith that they actually will?

Bury’s players are now out of pocket, the same players who won them promotion last season, I just hope they get picked up by other clubs.

Spare a thought for David Flitcroft and Mansfield too. Sacked after missing out on promotion on the final day, with one of the teams going up in their place going out of business before they played a fixture in the league above. Such a cruel irony.

This. You’ve got to feel for Bury fans but how the EFL have let a team get promoted when they continuously failed to pay their players.... 

They have to address the way they deal with this. Pay staff late once, get a warning. Next time, 3 point fine. And the next time. And the next time. Teams that stick to rules therefore have playing field evened. 

EFL seem to want to wait until last possible moment to get involved and then put hands up and say we did everything we could. They didn’t do everything they could because this has been coming for a while and for more than one club. 

‘The EFL have worked tirelessly’. Whatever. Maybe in last month. Should have been on it a year ago. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ska Junkie

Ska Junkie

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What does Steve Dale now stand to gain?  That’s the bit I’m keen to understand.  Was it predominantly Stewart Day that caused the problems.

How much money has he put in?  Other than his £1?  Has he lost anything?

He told Jim White that he’d put up security with the PFA, so that they would pay some of players wages.  Is this true?

The CVA was allegedly agreed because the creditors agreed to 25p in the £.  Yet stories that the creditors was connected to him and paid £70k for £7m debt, which would be worth £1.75m at 25p/£..

The creditor is his son in law Dave and your last paragraph is, I believe, correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robin1988

Robin1988

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

EFL frightened to death about legal action from other L1 Clubs

Useless organisation

I know what you mean but at this point what more could they do? The club can't fulfil it's league fixtures, had no financial prospects and even prospective owners didn't want anything to do with the club once they got close.

The EFL just shouldn't have let this charlatan take over the club in the first place. If he was the "successful businessman" he touted himself as why did he leave a string of dissolved companies in his wake, and more importantly where did the money go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1960maaan

1960maaan

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What does Steve Dale now stand to gain?  That’s the bit I’m keen to understand.  Was it predominantly Stewart Day that caused the problems.

How much money has he put in?  Other than his £1?  Has he lost anything?

He told Jim White that he’d put up security with the PFA, so that they would pay some of players wages.  Is this true?

The CVA was allegedly agreed because the creditors agreed to 25p in the £.  Yet stories that the creditors was connected to him and paid £70k for £7m debt, which would be worth £1.75m at 25p/£..

If this is true, I suspect he’s a worried man.

I hope the truth comes out.

I've been wondering this. I Googled Gigg Lane and it's owned by the club, now I don't know if there is one of those clauses that state it can only be used for football, but if not we may have an answer. 
As I understand it, he did a deal with the EFL?PFA to pay 50% of the players wages until the sale. He had agreed to pay back the money when the sale went through, not sure how that deal stands now. 

  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, 1960maaan said:

I've been wondering this. I Googled Gigg Lane and it's owned by the club, now I don't know if there is one of those clauses that state it can only be used for football, but if not we may have an answer. 
As I understand it, he did a deal with the EFL?PFA to pay 50% of the players wages until the sale. He had agreed to pay back the money when the sale went through, not sure how that deal stands now. 

Looks like he’ll be asking his son-in-law for a cut of the money he’s made!

3 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

The creditor is his son in law Dave and your last paragraph is, I believe, correct.

 

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
1960maaan

1960maaan

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

The creditor is his son in law Dave and your last paragraph is, I believe, correct.

 

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Looks like he’ll be asking his son-in-law for a cut of the money he’s made!

 

That is disgusting, and surely illegal. I hope Karma is swift in this case, can't rely on the EFL to do anything, so maybe the law might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted

In my very naive world, that’s one team in Lg2 that won’t get relegated this season, no relegation at all if Bolton cold too.

If this means some owners don’t have to gamble their league status and bigger debt this season, it might be a small crumb of comfort.

There are of course other knock-ons to other Lg1 clubs:

  • each team will now only play 22 (21 if Bolton too)home games, that’s 5% (10% if Bolton) lost income (gate receipts, sponsorship etc)
  • would season ticket holders be liable for a reduction as they’ve pre-paid 23 games?  Trivial matter I know, but still something to consider.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BobBobSuperBob

BobBobSuperBob

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

I know what you mean but at this point what more could they do? The club can't fulfil it's league fixtures, had no financial prospects and even prospective owners didn't want anything to do with the club once they got close.

The EFL just shouldn't have let this charlatan take over the club in the first place. If he was the "successful businessman" he touted himself as why did he leave a string of dissolved companies in his wake, and more importantly where did the money go?

This is what I was aiming at tbh and their total lack of backbone when it comes to regulation

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ska Junkie

Ska Junkie

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

Can someone explain for us stupid people what this all means? Buying and selling debt has always confused me.

Under a CVA, any company can offer to 'buy' the outstanding debt, in this case £7M. The son in law bought it for £70k knowing the administrator had stated a payment of 25p in the pound if liquidated. He now wants £1.75M for the £70k 'purchase' due to the original debt he bought @25 percent.

Edited by Ska Junkie
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bar BS3

Bar BS3

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Just announced on Sky, Bury have been expelled from the football league.

Sad, sad day. ?

All the rights and wrongs and everything else aside... why were they allowed to “start” the season..?

I always thought that every club, from Man Utd (formality, of course) to Bristol Rovers (book fiddling can do the trick) had to provide proof that they could complete the forthcoming season, prior to fixtures being released..? 

Terrible, terrible day for Bury and football in general - but this season’s state of affairs should never have been allowed to happen. 

2 minutes ago, pillred said:

And what precisely has that got to do with either Bolton or Bury?

It’s probably their fault. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Under a CVA, any company can offer to 'buy' the outstanding debt, in this case £7M. The son in law bought it for £70k knowing the administrator had stated a payment of 25p in the pound if liquidated. He now wants £1.75M for the £70k 'purchase' due to the original sent he bought @25 percent.

I thought I read that 75% of creditors had to agree, and the 75% was of creditors not related / connected ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted (edited)

Sad, sad day.

Don't ask me why but given his laisse faire/useless approach to governance I have a slight suspicion that Shaun Harvey would have let Bury start the season and after that who knows- may have unravelled really quickly but it's a suspicion that I can't fully shake.

12 hours ago it looked all good- the fans were there including Bolton fan helping to clean the ground- that guy in his 70s was there, the one who was turning up to the ground each day.

Dark day for English football, first such situation like this since "the modern era" began- sad times. Wise words from JL.

EC-fQBPWsAEWMVL.jpg

EC-fRrDWsAYYE2T.jpg

 

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
the1stknowle

the1stknowle

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

Can someone explain for us stupid people what this all means? Buying and selling debt has always confused me.

You buy debt based on amount of debt and the chance of it getting repaid. 

As has been reported by David Conn, 7m quid of debt was sold for 70k. So basically an assumption that there is 1 in 100 chance of full repayment. However, it was bought by an undisclosed related party (partner of owners daughter) and owner then negotiated the CVA that suddenly reevaluated chances of repayment from 1 in 100 to 1 in 4. Again, undisclosed that a related party was owner of the debt at stake in the CVA  

Thats about the sum of reporting on this thus far. 

Basically you tell someone that their house is worth 100 quid so they sell it to your son in law and then when your son in law buys it you immediately value it at 2500 quid without telling anyone who buys it that your son in law will make 2400 quid from your maths  

 

 

Edited by the1stknowle
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ska Junkie

Ska Junkie

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I thought I read that 75% of creditors had to agree, and the 75% was of creditors not related / connected ?

I understood, from chatting to Bury fans in our Manc office that the £7M makes up more than 75% Dave. It sounds like a total stitch up TBH.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ska Junkie

Ska Junkie

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, the1stknowle said:

You buy debt based on amount of debt and the chance of it getting repaid. 

As has been reported by David Conn, 7m quid of debt was sold for 70k. So basically an assumption that there is 1 in 100 chance of full repayment. However, it was bought by an undisclosed related party (partner of owner) and owner then negotiated the CVA that suddenly reevaluated chances of repayment from 1 in 100 to 1 in 4. Again, undisclosed that a related party was owner of the debt at stake in the CVA  

Thats about the sum of reporting on this thus far. 

Basically you tell someone that their house is worth 100 quid so they sell it to your son in law and then when your son in law buys it you immediately value it at 2500 quid without telling anyone who buys it that your son in law will make 2400 quid from your maths  

 

 

Thanks T1K, you've explained it far better than me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lrrr

Lrrr

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

In my very naive world, that’s one team in Lg2 that won’t get relegated this season, no relegation at all if Bolton cold too.

If this means some owners don’t have to gamble their league status and bigger debt this season, it might be a small crumb of comfort.

There are of course other knock-ons to other Lg1 clubs:

  • each team will now only play 22 (21 if Bolton too)home games, that’s 5% (10% if Bolton) lost income (gate receipts, sponsorship etc)
  • would season ticket holders be liable for a reduction as they’ve pre-paid 23 games?  Trivial matter I know, but still something to consider.

A lot of clubs (we definitely have done) advertise as £x per game, would think there could be a case now as that cost per game has increased and therefore not what was advertised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ska Junkie

Ska Junkie

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

Sad day for football, but why have Bolton been given another 14 days, thought administrator said Tuesday was last day and they will be liquidated Wednesday.

What has changed for them to get another 14 days.

I thought he said he would start the liquidation process on Wednesday. They are essentially 2 weeks behind the very unfortunate Bury.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robin1988

Robin1988

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, hodge said:

A lot of clubs (we definitely have done) advertise as £x per game, would think there could be a case now as that cost per game has increased and therefore not what was advertised.

I’m not sure it’s legally binding if it was accurate at the time of print, and tbh I hope it isn’t.
 

I know fans miss out on their teams playing Bury but something doesn’t sit right about teams paying out because other clubs are badly run.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr Balls

Dr Balls

Posted
Posted

Bury have been finished off by 2 sharks. The first one loaded the debts of his failing business onto the football club. The second one, on the basis of no personal investment at all (£1) is looking to make a quick million or two from the club going bust and selling off its assets to the creditors, which alledgely include a close family member, who apparently bought some of the debt at a knockdown price.

Neither of these 2 “businessmen” should have been let anywhere near a football club, but only in the EFL could you also have one of the Oystons previously act as an advisor for others club owners on behalf of the EFL itself. As long as club owners have control over the EFL, this situation will not improve, and the risk is that more clubs could go to the wall, thanks to poor decisions and dodgy dealings, plus what appears to be a complete lack of appropriate governance from those supposedly running the leagues.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted (edited)

20 years ago in August- and on this date in fact having looked it up we played Bury.

Remember it vaguely as it was my first full season but Bristol City 1-1 Bury, 28th August 1999. Pulis v Warnock.

That Bury statement I fear could have been a harbinger- they put out a statement coming up to 5pm about CCTV, not entering the ground without permission- already posted about it but I wonder...

Who owns Gigg Lane?

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robin1988

Robin1988

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

So if they are being liquidated how can they continue.

They’ve put out a statement tonight saying they’re still in talks with bidders.

Sounds like liquidation was a threat to get buyers to hurry up. Not too encouraging that they didn’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wayne allisons tongues

wayne allisons tongues

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

They’ve put out a statement tonight saying they’re still in talks with bidders.

Sounds like liquidation was a threat to get buyers to hurry up. Not too encouraging that they didn’t.

But Bury were in talks with bidders today but have been expelled.

I have said this before I think Bolton have been getting preferential treatment from the league. Plus they didn’t have the guts to expel 2 teams at once. 

A club with 5 players who cancel matches for they say there youth team can’t play twice a week can continue getting best 5 0 every week.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted

Worst thing is, well it's worst for Bury right now and followed by Bolton of course.

However a significantly bad factor- I think and fear it maybe the tip of the icerberg- got a bad feeling that in the medium term we may see quite a few more in the Lower Leagues on this path- be it poor ownership, lack of cash, whatever.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robin1988

Robin1988

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

But Bury were in talks with bidders today but have been expelled.

I have said this before I think Bolton have been getting preferential treatment from the league. Plus they didn’t have the guts to expel 2 teams at once. 

A club with 5 players who cancel matches for they say there youth team can’t play twice a week can continue getting best 5 0 every week.

 

It was a different situation mate. Bolton had their 14-day notice period put on hold, and that was lifted tonight. If they don’t find new owners in 14 days, they’re chucked out.

That’s the deadline that Bury failed to meet on Friday, and again today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
downendcity

downendcity

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, the1stknowle said:

You buy debt based on amount of debt and the chance of it getting repaid. 

As has been reported by David Conn, 7m quid of debt was sold for 70k. So basically an assumption that there is 1 in 100 chance of full repayment. However, it was bought by an undisclosed related party (partner of owners daughter) and owner then negotiated the CVA that suddenly reevaluated chances of repayment from 1 in 100 to 1 in 4. Again, undisclosed that a related party was owner of the debt at stake in the CVA  

Thats about the sum of reporting on this thus far. 

Basically you tell someone that their house is worth 100 quid so they sell it to your son in law and then when your son in law buys it you immediately value it at 2500 quid without telling anyone who buys it that your son in law will make 2400 quid from your maths  

I my have misinterpreted this, but Im sure I also read that with a CVA the various creditors have to agree by majority ( based on size of debt I think) in order that the CVA is passed, and by "selling" the largest debt to the son-in-law it meant that the son in law's  vote would carry the vote and ensure the CVA being agreed, thereby ensuring an immediate "profit" for the family. 

If so, then the owner, through the son in law, was ensuring that he ( the family) profited from the club's misfortune. It also begs the question as to whether by selling the debt in the way they did, they would benefit better and quicker with the club's demise.

As many others have said this sad situation raises many questions, particularly about the EFL's involvement in and handling of the whole situation - from the owner passing the EFL's fit and proper test despite his business track record, through to failing to see the warning signs and how they could/should have stepped in earlier to avoid the loss of a club.

Following on, as this does,  from the recent shambolic run around the EFL were given by Vila, Derby and Wednesday over "stadiumgate", and the admittance that someone cocked up the new rules by failing to transfer across the  rule that prevented sale of a stadium to a related third party, the EFL comes out of the summer looking unprofessional, inept and self-serving.

I'm not holding my breath that there will be any accountability for this catalogue of failure,

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
the1stknowle

the1stknowle

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, downendcity said:

I my have misinterpreted this, but Im sure I also read that with a CVA the various creditors have to agree by majority ( based on size of debt I think) in order that the CVA is passed, and by "selling" the largest debt to the son-in-law it meant that the son in law's  vote would carry the vote and ensure the CVA being agreed, thereby ensuring an immediate "profit" for the family. 

If so, then the owner, through the son in law, was ensuring that he ( the family) profited from the club's misfortune. It also begs the question as to whether by selling the debt in the way they did, they would benefit better and quicker with the club's demise.

As many others have said this sad situation raises many questions, particularly about the EFL's involvement in and handling of the whole situation - from the owner passing the EFL's fit and proper test despite his business track record, through to failing to see the warning signs and how they could/should have stepped in earlier to avoid the loss of a club.

Following on, as this does,  from the recent shambolic run around the EFL were given by Vila, Derby and Wednesday over "stadiumgate", and the admittance that someone cocked up the new rules by failing to transfer across the  rule that prevented sale of a stadium to a related third party, the EFL comes out of the summer looking unprofessional, inept and self-serving.

I'm not holding my breath that there will be any accountability for this catalogue of failure,

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/aug/27/bury-historic-club-football-league-financial-ruins

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/aug/23/bury-company-debt-cva-steve-dale-daughter

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Always Believesham

Always Believesham

Posted
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

But Bury were in talks with bidders today but have been expelled.

I have said this before I think Bolton have been getting preferential treatment from the league. Plus they didn’t have the guts to expel 2 teams at once. 

A club with 5 players who cancel matches for they say there youth team can’t play twice a week can continue getting best 5 0 every week.

 

I also feel like Bolton have been getting preferential treatment - but from a business point of view (not saying this is how football should be run) they are marginally the more likely to survive and are a bigger 'brand' at the moment. That is what matters to the EFL.

Shouldn't be forgotten that Bury had already agreed their CVA - this is quite a long way down the liquidation route (if I've got this right). Portsmouth were on the verge (10 years ago) because they couldn't get a CVA agreed, I imagine any attempt to agree one would be the next step for Bolton?

I also believe that Bury do own Gigg Lane but took out loans against the ground (under the Stewart Day) from his companies at extortionate interest rates, so they do own the ground but only until whoever owns that debt calls it in.

Kieron Maguire is right - full disclosure is essential, there are obvious difficulties around how competitive this makes a club but for one owner (Dale) and two prospective investors to not know the extent of the debt the club are in, it shows how big the problems are.

Edited by solihull cider red
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Constant Rabbit

The Constant Rabbit

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Ska Junkie said:

I would imagine the start of the liquidation process is the countdown to a deadline of 14 days WAT but I'm guessing to be honest.

Sorry.

It's a legal requirement.

I don't think a club has ever survived the start if this process.

Unless Bolton get an amazing stroke of luck - ie someone sticking in 25mil cash to guarantee the season payments to staff - then the expulsion will activate automatically in 13 days.

I'd say they have a 0.1% chance

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daored

daored

Posted
Posted (edited)

The day after Bury are expelled from the EFL and the problems at Bolton, the ‘big six’ are reported AGAIN as looking at a breakaway league.

This is what’s completely wrong with the football in this country , Grred, Greed , Greed.

It makes me sick 

Edited by daored
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lrrr

Lrrr

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Loco Rojo said:

What happens to the results that Bury should have played already? (first 6 games).  Do those teams automatically receive 3 points or are they treated as a draw?

Presumably nothing, they'll play 42/44 games depending on Bolton presume Bolton's results will be expunged if they go

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redland

Redland

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

Sad day for football, but why have Bolton been given another 14 days, thought administrator said Tuesday was last day and they will be liquidated Wednesday.

What has changed for them to get another 14 days.

Because the bigger clubs always get treated more leniently by the powers that be. Reminds me of when Swindon were relegated two divisions for financial irregularities and at the same time time Spurs were only fined for the same offence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sir Geoff

Sir Geoff

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, daored said:

The day after Bury are expelled from the EFL and the problems at Bolton, the ‘big six’ are reported AGAIN as looking at a breakaway league.

This is what’s completely wrong with the football in this country , Grred, Greed , Greed.

It makes me sick 

Good let them all **** off to play one another week in week out. Leave the rest of us to play in a proper competitive league.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BS2 Red

BS2 Red

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Good let them all **** off to play one another week in week out. Leave the rest of us to play in a proper competitive league.

In the long term that might be for the best, but in the short term it would destroy many of the existing clubs. 

Not much money seems to filter down, but clubs absolutely rely on the little that does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
exAtyeoMax

exAtyeoMax

Posted
Posted

That Steve Dale character is should never been allowed to take over Bury. I really hope he doesn’t profit in anyway from this fiasco.

 Is there anyway back for Bury? Will that numpty be able to sell their ground? Can the fans sue him/Stewart Day? It makes me so angry 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bristol Rob

Bristol Rob

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, exAtyeoMax said:

That Steve Dale character is should never been allowed to take over Bury. I really hope he doesn’t profit in anyway from this fiasco.

 Is there anyway back for Bury? Will that numpty be able to sell their ground? Can the fans sue him/Stewart Day? It makes me so angry 

Sounds like Dale is a professional asset stripper. Buying companies in distress, reorganisation the debt and then selling the debt on at a profit.

I would imagine the 7mil sold to his son in law for 70k and now valued at 1.2mil is a 'secured' figure, so after the administrator is paid, that amount will be realised from the sale of the stadium. 

I am guessing by the way, but I will be surprised if they are out of pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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