Wigan Athletic | Page 3 | Vital Football

Wigan Athletic

  • Thread starter Deleted member 13556
  • Start date
Let’s not get the wrong idea here. If someone sells a business to a twat then it’s the responsibility and fault of the seller. Don’t lay the responsibility at the EFL.
 
Clubs at League one and League two with wealthy owners will take advantage of the situation to get their squads ready! Mansfield Town have already signed new players and Forest Green Rovers already have a couple in and another one signing on Monday!
They’re owned by *****.
 
Any rich idiot can get a non-league team into League 1 within a few years.

Not true! Many have failed! Also, its being sustainable when you get there! Since reaching the football league FGR have made a few million from transfer fees and sell ons! Very healthy position without the chairmans money!
 
Not true! Many have failed! Also, its being sustainable when you get there! Since reaching the football league FGR have made a few million from transfer fees and sell ons! Very healthy position without the chairmans money!
FGR lost £12 million over six years to get to League 2, paying £172 for every £100 of income they earned.

It’s only natural that they would finally try and be self-sustainable after reaching a certain level, despite making losses of £785k last set of accounts. Owners aren’t a bottomless source of wealth.
 
Something I dont think has been mentioned is that since the return of football a few weeks ago Wigan Athletic have played 3 matches and won them all thus taking them well clear of the bottom 3 before going into administration was announced!
Im guessing that if there is this bet on the them getting relegated they were expecting Wigan Athletic to go down without the administrators being appointed and not needing the 12 point deduction!

I think the whole point of the thread on twitter was pointing out the fact Wigan have been put into admin just as they appear to be getting out of trouble.

If they’d lost their last 3 there would be no need (if the betting thing is true).
 
Let’s not get the wrong idea here. If someone sells a business to a twat then it’s the responsibility and fault of the seller. Don’t lay the responsibility at the EFL.
Que??

It might be the previous owners “fault” that a club has ended up in poor hands. But he/they won’t give two hoots about what happens in the future.

There most definitely is a responsibility on the EFL to keep member clubs (and owners) of the EFL trustworthy.
 
Que??

It might be the previous owners “fault” that a club has ended up in poor hands. But he/they won’t give two hoots about what happens in the future.

There most definitely is a responsibility on the EFL to keep member clubs (and owners) of the EFL trustworthy.
It’s a business decision. I’d be interested to know what legal right the EFL has in having a say in business decisions, beit new owners, a new stadium or a new kit.

It’s a nicety and we’re sure as glad that it’s there, even if it can’t seem to tell that a new owner’s address is at the equivalent to WHSmith in Westfield Stratford. Us fans lay all responsibility at the hands of the EFL.
 
It’s a business decision. I’d be interested to know what legal right the EFL has in having a say in business decisions, beit new owners, a new stadium or a new kit.

It’s a nicety and we’re sure as glad that it’s there, even if it can’t seem to tell that a new owner’s address is at the equivalent to WHSmith in Westfield Stratford. Us fans lay all responsibility at the hands of the EFL.

Because that business (football club) has to meet certain criteria to be a member of the EFL. Part of that criteria is the owner passing the EFL "fit and proper" test. The EFL have the power to withdraw membership if the club do not meet certain parts of the EFL criteria of membership, as they did with Bury.

The EFL fit and proper persons test is bullshit and clearly not fit for purpose, as are half the EFL board.
 
It’s a business decision. I’d be interested to know what legal right the EFL has in having a say in business decisions, beit new owners, a new stadium or a new kit.

It’s a nicety and we’re sure as glad that it’s there, even if it can’t seem to tell that a new owner’s address is at the equivalent to WHSmith in Westfield Stratford. Us fans lay all responsibility at the hands of the EFL.

I know it’s a business decision. That’s why an owner couldn’t give a toss about who he sells it to so long as he gets his money. And you have to have a governing body to regulate the membership as Captain has just explained.

Same in many walks of life and many professions. Doctors, accountants, legal firms, electrical companies. You can’t practice unless you are a member and follow the rules.
 
I know it’s a business decision. That’s why an owner couldn’t give a toss about who he sells it to so long as he gets his money. And you have to have a governing body to regulate the membership as Captain has just explained.

Same in many walks of life and many professions. Doctors, accountants, legal firms, electrical companies. You can’t practice unless you are a member and follow the rules.

That only works if the buyer intends to run the business as football club. If their only intention is profit from the sale of a club's assets (like the guy who owns Bury) then the EFLs rules are meaningless
 
Writing in the Metro, Colin Murray reports that:

- Wigan was sold on 4th June 2020 to Next Leader Fund, registered in the Cayman Islands.
- NLF provided a Loan Facility to Wigan FC - with an interest rate of 8%p.a - but increasing to 20% if the club defaulted.

This looks very close to the sort of profit shift (by above market interest rates) that HMRC is supposed to police.

It also guarantees a "dividend" to NLF - that few Clubs seem to be able to pay their shareholders.
(Legally, interest gets paid before dividends - and in Administration, debtors have more rights than shareholders.)

Worse, it looks like a structure designed deliberately to fail - i.e. a hair's breadth away from a 20% interest charge that would, in practice, trigger Administration - and the ability of NLF to walk away from debts at WFC.....
....and maybe buy back the Club on the cheap.

That's exactly the sort of financial jiggery-pokery that the EFL should prevent......
....and if they don't, MPs, who are already contemplating tighter rules around ownership of a "community" asset, should be made aware of.
 
That only works if the buyer intends to run the business as football club. If their only intention is profit from the sale of a club's assets (like the guy who owns Bury) then the EFLs rules are meaningless

Surely the stated intent of the buyer of a football club in the EFL (or any association) should be to continue it as a football club. Otherwise the EFL can say “no sale, not fit and proper, that is a member club”.
 
Costs at Wigan, in players` wages alone, have been/are very high and the ownership would be facing significant net loss each week. The Furlough scheme would only subsidise a small fraction of wages. The "ownership" , whoever they really are, has apparently been frustrated by Wigan`s failure to get back into the Premiership - so maybe the ownership are not that savvy in terms of the domestic game here. Could be a simple economic argument - no money coming in, no probability of Premiership gold and ever increasing monies going out - solution - walk away !

Dave Whelan was apparently putting in £6 million from his own pocket each season he was at the helm. He`s now unwell (apparently Dementia) and neither he nor his family are thought to have any desire of putting any of their cash into rescuing the club.

Not good news if you`re a Wigan fan - they have a good playing team and good coaching team. Who`ll be next ?
 
Because that business (football club) has to meet certain criteria to be a member of the EFL. Part of that criteria is the owner passing the EFL "fit and proper" test. The EFL have the power to withdraw membership if the club do not meet certain parts of the EFL criteria of membership, as they did with Bury.

The EFL fit and proper persons test is bullshit and clearly not fit for purpose, as are half the EFL board.

Oh, come on Captain, that's hardly fair. Are you really suggesting that half of the board are fit for purpose?