+ Visit Burnley FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Calder Vale Holdings another Alan Pace Company

  1. #31
    Time and tide wait for no man Alto, the whole shooting match is owned and operated by either BURNLEY FC HOLDINGS LIMITED, Company number 08335231, or THE BURNLEY FOOTBALL & ATHLETIC COMPANY LIMITED, Company number 00054222, or most likely LONGSIDE PROPERTIES LIMITED Company number 05202619, or CLARETS GO LARGE LIMITED, Company number 10158750.

    The common denominators in all of these companies are Messrs Garlick, Banaszkiewicz, Crabb, Flood, Holt, Kilby, and Nelson with the exception of CLARETS GO LARGE LIMITED, Company number 10158750, which is solely owned by Michael Lee Garlick.

    If Calder Vale Holdings want to pick the bones out of that lot, tally ho and good luck is what I say!

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    34,432
    Yes, like I have said, it’s all very transparent, on the same lines of a Mafia’s accounting book’s.

    If they can do a fiddle on such a large scale it makes their day to day running of the Club even more inexcusable.

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Altobelli View Post
    Yes, like I have said, it’s all very transparent, on the same lines of a Mafia’s accounting book’s.

    If they can do a fiddle on such a large scale it makes their day to day running of the Club even more inexcusable.
    There is no suggestion of a "fiddle" though Alto. All of the companies mentioned are domiciled in the UK and all publish audited accounts regularly and in most cases bang on time.

    I suppose keeping the ship afloat and paying its way is what is foremost in Garlick's mind Alto. Being in the English Premier League on a shoestring must be totally bloody hard work.

    One of the above mentioned directors used to be quite an important customer of mine. I intend to invite him over for a coffee and a little chat.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    21,970
    Quote Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier View Post

    Being in the English Premier League on a shoestring must be totally bloody hard work.
    £138 million annual turnover. Shoestring my arse.

    FFS BT, the Yanks are sniffing round, and as you well know, American businessmen on the prowl aren't usually prowling for shoestrings, they sniff money, big money, that's what gets them out of bed of a morning, not shoestrings.
    Last edited by sinkov; 17-10-2020 at 09:42 AM.

  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by sinkov View Post
    £138 million annual turnover. Shoestring my arse.

    FFS BT, the Yanks are sniffing round, and as you well know, American businessmen on the prowl aren't usually prowling for shoestrings, they sniff money, big money, that's what gets them out of bed of a morning, not shoestrings.
    If we were in the BIG MONEY LEAGUE sinkov we would have the same amount to spend on players per annum.

    I have studied the accounts pretty closely over the last couple of years and the MINIMUM operating costs are running at about £105,000.000, which really does not leave us a lot to play with in the transfer market.

    The loss of SKY TV revenue is a big hit for a club the size of ours. I think the anti-Garlick Brigade need to give the bloke a break, because his priority must be to keep the club afloat, financially liquid and viable - don't you? .

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,722
    Quote Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier View Post
    If we were in the BIG MONEY LEAGUE sinkov we would have the same amount to spend on players per annum.

    I have studied the accounts pretty closely over the last couple of years and the MINIMUM operating costs are running at about £105,000.000, which really does not leave us a lot to play with in the transfer market.

    The loss of SKY TV revenue is a big hit for a club the size of ours. I think the anti-Garlick Brigade need to give the bloke a break, because his priority must be to keep the club afloat, financially liquid and viable - don't you? .
    Then he should get on and do that BT and support the manager better than he has done to press, even today’s statement concedes we’re looking for outside investment and have been for some time , I think thats a white flag as far as Garlick And co are concerned , that’s not a criticism of them either.

    They have obviously reached the point where they aren’t willing to gamble with any of their own money and are looking to shift responsibilities.

    I can understand caution to a point but when a lot of other clubs are strengthening and let’s be honest they weren’t in the same situation as us with so many crucial first team players missing , it’s doesn’t bode well going forward as they aren’t going to back the manager .

    So the more I think about they should get on with it and sharpish as well.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Forum Info

Footymad Forums offer you the chance to interact and discuss all things football with fellow fans from around the world, and share your views on footballing issues from the latest, breaking transfer rumours to the state of the game at international level and everything in between.

Whether your team is battling it out for the Premier League title or struggling for League survival, there's a forum for you!

Gooners, Mackems, Tractor Boys - you're all welcome, please just remember to respect the opinions of others.

Click here for a full list of the hundreds of forums available to you

The forums are free to join, although you must play fair and abide by the rules explained here, otherwise your ability to post may be temporarily or permanently revoked.

So what are you waiting for? Register now and join the debate!

(these forums are not actively moderated, so if you wish to report any comment made by another member please report it.)



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •