Bury FC & Bolton Wanderers

I'm sure there's been comment about this on other threads throughout the summer, but this is a big story that I think deserves it's own thread. The demise of these two clubs is extremely depressing, and a real warning to football.

I decided to take a little look into things, and I found an article that said that the cause of Bury's situation is largely caused by a £4.2m loan debt. Now, I'm not suggesting that it is the responsibility of other clubs to bail out awful owners, and realistically the owners have to face the consequences. But if you you take that £4.2m as a given, that is a pittance in football generally.

Alexis Sanchez reportedly earns around £400,000 per week. That's nearly £21m a season. For a benchwarmer. That's 5 times the loan that is going to put a 130+ year old club out of business.

Premier League TV revenue is, what, a £2.5 billion? How is this being allowed to happen.

I am sure there are hundreds of reasons why this proposal can't be, but here's what I want to happen.

1. For all wages a club spends, they must give an additional 1% of that wage bill to a centralised pool of money.
2. If a club is being wound up, and the owners have proven there is nothing more they can do, the owners are removed.
3. The centralised pool of money clears the debt for that club
4. The owners are removed, and replaced with an FA appointed chairman and a board of directors made up of fans

What do you think? Are there better ideas? Should we just let clubs die because their owners are irresponsible?
MIAHammerSuzanneClaretmikeHammerwombatColchester_Iron

Comments

  • Not sure (it's not something that I've followed as a story, really) but I don't like to see clubs leaving their creditors in the lurch. Which happens when they go bankrupt, are then bought by someone new and 'rebuilt'.
  • It does baffle me that the Premier League and/or individual clubs don't step in and help.

    It would be such a pittance for each Premier League club to pull together and contribute a bit until new owners are in place.
    alderz
  • If and its a big if PL clubs bailed out clubs what's to stop the next club asking for money when they get into trouble and the one after that etc. I can't see club bailing them out as they won't want to set a precedent. The FA run football in this country and spend millions on the England training camp etc and get millions in sponsorship I think if anyone should help it should be the FA imo. Unfortunately football is now a business and businesses goankrupt if they are poorly run by management and its the staff and customer who pay the price.
  • There is the question of moral hazard. It is risky taking away the responsibilty for debt from those that incur it. It may be a paltry 4.2m today but if the concept of the bail out by FA/Premiere league were to take root then...
    There needs to be a way to make sure that a club can't get into this situation in the first place. Maybe football clubs need to be required to pay/hold a percentage of their transfer payments/wage bill in a trust fund in some way.
    chicagohammerBubblesNeverDies
  • I think that debts created by the owners should be transferred to the owners, but it just feels that owners get to wash their hands and leave the fans in the lurch and that just feels wrong
    imagelostColchester_IronBubblesNeverDies
  • The current owner bought it for £1???

    Sounds like its been in the mire for a long time.
    Deanscaleshammer
  • MrsGrey said:

    Not sure (it's not something that I've followed as a story, really) but I don't like to see clubs leaving their creditors in the lurch. Which happens when they go bankrupt, are then bought by someone new and 'rebuilt'.

    Southampton did this. After the inland revenue got ALL monies owed to them the rest of Southamptons creditors got a penny for every pound owed. Two established local businesses went bust and people lost their jobs.

    The saints moved on and became an established premier league side.

    Charlton on the other hand paid all creditors back all monies owed.

    Clubs can do the right thing, if they want to.
    MoojoralderzColchester_IronBubblesNeverDies
  • Oh and Ald, that’s a great plan :ok:
  • edited August 23
    Former Port Vale owner Norman Smurthwaite offered to buy Bury but owner Steve Dale turned it down as he didn't think the price was right.

    Apparently Dale wants £1m to walk away. Earlier today on Talksport he asked fans, local businesses and celebrities to cough up £2.7m.
  • One of the other issues in all of this are the loans to clubs.

    Now, we all know what happens when banks don't carry out due diligence and loan a load of people money they will never be able to pay back.

    The worlds economy crashes into the toilet.

    Who checked that Bury had the capability to pay back a loan, could they meet the monthly payments, was the interest crippling them.... looks like none, no and more than likely.

    Should be FA be consulted when a club needs a loan just to meet regular bills and wages payments? I think so, mainly to save clubs for themselves.

  • edited August 23

    It does baffle me that the Premier League and/or individual clubs don't step in and help.

    It would be such a pittance for each Premier League club to pull together and contribute a bit until new owners are in place.

    In the Telegraph it says that clubs are not allowed to donate money to each other, not sure where that rule is but that would explain why none of the bigger clubs have offered to help.
  • MrsGrey said:

    Not sure (it's not something that I've followed as a story, really) but I don't like to see clubs leaving their creditors in the lurch. Which happens when they go bankrupt, are then bought by someone new and 'rebuilt'.

    Southampton did this. After the inland revenue got ALL monies owed to them the rest of Southamptons creditors got a penny for every pound owed. Two established local businesses went bust and people lost their jobs.

    The saints moved on and became an established premier league side.

    Charlton on the other hand paid all creditors back all monies owed.

    Clubs can do the right thing, if they want to.
    That's one of the reasons I hate Southampton.
    SuzanneClaretbaracks_a_hammer
  • It would make sense - clubs helping others out financially - it's paying to affect the the outcome of the league as it prevents points deductions/relegations and so on.
    SuzanneClaret
  • edited August 23

    Former Port Vale owner Norman Smurthwaite offered to buy Bury but owner Steve Dale turned it down as he didn't think the price was right.

    Apparently Dale wants £1m to walk away. Earlier today on Talksport he asked fans, local businesses and celebrities to cough up £2.7m.

    Dale clearly could not care less about the club. Would rather watch it go to the wall than sell.

    What an odious man he is.
    alderzmike
  • In an interview on the itv news today steve dale said the club were solvent and not in debt and he blamed the efl. :hmm:
  • *rolls eyes out loud

    He’s delusional.
    alderz
  • Manchester Evening News says that the Bury deal didn't happen and the 5pm deadline has now passed. Not good.
  • edited August 27
    It is sad to see these stalwart names of many years face oblivion. For me though the basic premise should be that clubs should be run sustainably and risks managed effectively:

    If they are then they thrive and have a long term future.
    If not then they struggle and eventually have to go out of existence.

    Anything other than these consequences would distort behaviour inappropriately and seem unfair.
  • edited August 27
    Nice to see Jim White standing in front of a deadline countdown clock on Sky. What an absolute twonk.
    SuzanneClaretalderzHamstewLukerzOldCastleSwift
  • Nice to see Jim White standing in front of a deadline countdown clock on Sky. What an absolute twonk.

    Money can't buy class. Sky are living proof of that.
    SuzanneClaret
  • It is sad to see these stalwart names of many years face oblivion. For me though the basic premise should be that clubs should be run sustainably and risks managed effectively:

    If they are then they thrive and have a long term future.
    If not then they struggle and eventually have to go out of existence.

    Anything other than these consequences would distort behaviour inappropriately and seem unfair.

    :ok:

    If they've been managed unsustainable, in order to gain an advantage against competing clubs who have 'cut their cloth' (as it were) then they really can't expect to geta free pass, as it is unfair on the other clubs.

    A shame for the fans though - they don't make the decisions, but suffer the consequences of bad ones. (Of course, they feel the benefit if the decisions made are good ones.)
    DeanscaleshammerMoojor
  • Didn't Bournemouth do the 10p in the pound thing when they were in trouble? I seem to remember something like that and now they're everyone's favourite little seaside club. Apologies to Bournemouth if I'm wrong.
  • Didn't Bournemouth do the 10p in the pound thing when they were in trouble? I seem to remember something like that and now they're everyone's favourite little seaside club. Apologies to Bournemouth if I'm wrong.

    Scroll up the page, on Friday Suze mentioned Southampton did this.

    Seaside clubs, they all look the same to me...
  • Southampton did a 1p on the £1 after paying the tax man off
  • ASLEF, just had a quick look and it seems as though Bournemouth were in trouble in 2005 and paid 5p in the pound and again in 2008 when creditors were told they should expect to lose a considerable amount of their money. Thereafter the new business was launched.
    ASLEFshrugged
  • Personally, the Southampton thing (and Bournemouth now I know about it) makes me cross, but it doesn't make me cross at them as a club. It makes me cross at the system that enables that sort of decision making to be allowed, and the businessmen who created the situation. I assume most (all?) of the directors involved are probably not with the clubs anymore?
    Giant_Hammer
  • Think the bury owner Steve dale had forty seven companies and all but four were wound up, either not a very good businessman or just plain unlucky
  • Or a conman who makes his money buying and then winding up businesses.
    ASLEFshruggedSuzanneClaretBubblesNeverDies
Sign In or Register to comment.