are we doomed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by campo21

As far as me moaning gary i am angry at the way our club has been run into the ground i blame Gartside but also Davies for letting Gartside do it.

---

We all know Gartside tells lies Campo.

This is what Gartside said back in 2003.

Chairman's new Reebok pledge
Wanderers' home will forever be known as the Reebok Stadium.
Chairman Phil Gartside says that whatever sponsorship deals are done in the future the club's successful association with sportswear firm Reebok will forever be reflected in the stadium.
"Just like there is only one 'The Arsenal' there is also only one 'The Reebok'," Mr Gartside declared.
Wanderers and Reebok have been mutually beneficial since they struck up close business links several years ago.
Reebok enjoy having their directly linked with the football club of the town where it started the business of manufacturing and selling sportswear generations ago. While Wanderers reap significant income from their ma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyp1803

As far as me moaning gary i am angry at the way our club has been run into the ground i blame Gartside but also Davies for letting Gartside do it.

---

We all know Gartside tells lies Campo.

This is what Gartside said back in 2003.

Chairman's new Reebok pledge
Wanderers' home will forever be known as the Reebok Stadium.
Chairman Phil Gartside says that whatever sponsorship deals are done in the future the club's successful association with sportswear firm Reebok will forever be reflected in the stadium.
"Just like there is only one 'The Arsenal' there is also only one 'The Reebok'," Mr Gartside declared.
Wanderers and Reebok have been mutually beneficial since they struck up close business links several years ago.
Reebok enjoy having their directly linked with the football club of the town where it started the business of manufacturing and selling sportswear generations ago. While

I've read that before gary,i think the question has to be asked how is the clown still our chairman after all the lie's and mistakes he has made.

Not looking good, we will at least find out tomorrow, who is going.

My understanding is that all outgoings come out of Davies' pocket, at an additional cost to the club.
People that think he does this out of fondness for the club are blinkered, as the interest is crippling, and a big revenue stream for him. There might also be tax advantages to his other businesses of the losses we continuously make.

Gartside said on the radio after the last set of accounts that it's all fine and dandy because the 160m on the balance sheet is equity, not debt. Obviously it's better to owe 160m to your owner than to banks, but it's still worrying.

I know Fulham owed Al Fayed 200m at one point, which he effectively wrote off, six months before selling the club. I know we're no Fulham in terms of profitability, but it shows it might not be as gloomy as it seems.

it is as gloomy as it seems danm al fayed could afford to write any debt off that fulham had with his couple of billion personal fortune eddie davies will have thrown most if not all his wealth into bwfc & whilst he may at some point realise he will have to write a said amount off there is no way whatsoever he will do an al fayed, even if he wrote half of the 160m off we are still in one hell of a mess with no hope of eddie ever finding a buyer for the club with our crippling losses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danm1992

My understanding is that all outgoings come out of Davies' pocket, at an additional cost to the club.
People that think he does this out of fondness for the club are blinkered, as the interest is crippling, and a big revenue stream for him. There might also be tax advantages to his other businesses of the losses we continuously make.

Gartside said on the radio after the last set of accounts that it's all fine and dandy because the 160m on the balance sheet is equity, not debt. Obviously it's better to owe 160m to your owner than to banks, but it's still worrying.

I know Fulham owed Al Fayed 200m at one point, which he effectively wrote off, six months before selling the club. I know we're no Fulham in terms of profitability, but it shows it might not be as gloomy as it seems.

---

If the 160 million debt is nothing to worry about and it is equity, which Gartside states, why isn't Eddie writing off the bulk of the debt? I mean Leices

It will have some benefit for Davies that is certain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whatsmore

I feel its time we fans started to accept the state of affairs at bwfc I must admit its only from yesterday that ive started to realize we are definitely doomed and if anyone can come up with a valid alternate positive view I would love to hear it.i see a football club run by a slimey lying asset stripping chaiman.an owner who no longer can finance a club more than 160million in debt,oh its eddies debt is it?so he or his family will right it off will they?like fck they will.so we have no possibility of investment no possibility of anyone buying the club,and a manager young and hungry and with a glittering career ahead of him,sadly not in football but in butties he sells in his catering business,well me personaly wouldn't trust him to make a sandwich interesting.overall lower leagues beckon lads and theres fck all any of us hardworking loyal fans can do about it. :blue: :blue: :blue:

---

post of the week for me ...little cynical bu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyp1803

My understanding is that all outgoings come out of Davies' pocket, at an additional cost to the club.
People that think he does this out of fondness for the club are blinkered, as the interest is crippling, and a big revenue stream for him. There might also be tax advantages to his other businesses of the losses we continuously make.

Gartside said on the radio after the last set of accounts that it's all fine and dandy because the 160m on the balance sheet is equity, not debt. Obviously it's better to owe 160m to your owner than to banks, but it's still worrying.

I know Fulham owed Al Fayed 200m at one point, which he effectively wrote off, six months before selling the club. I know we're no Fulham in terms of profitability, but it shows it might not be as gloomy as it seems.

---

If the 160 million debt is nothing to worry about and it is equity, which Gartside states, why isn't Eddie