Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Burnley - was a Farnell & El Kashashy story, now a leveraged US takeover.

1…1011131516…20

Comments

  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,651
    Do we know how Burnley is set up?

    We hear about a '£200m turnover' but ESI allegedly took us over for £50m until it all unravelled and we realised that all they actually paid was £1 for the Club and Roland retained the ground etc, etc.

    They then milked us for 'consultancy' and other questionable expenses as we know until it all got exposed.

    Who is to say that the Burnley plan isn't  similar potentially but with Premier league numbers and thus larger financial scope?

    Soup de jour Rodney soup de jour.
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 69,842
    LenGlover said:
    Do we know how Burnley is set up?

    We hear about a '£200m turnover' but ESI allegedly took us over for £50m until it all unravelled and we realised that all they actually paid was £1 for the Club and Roland retained the ground etc, etc.

    They then milked us for 'consultancy' and other questionable expenses as we know until it all got exposed.

    Who is to say that the Burnley plan isn't  similar potentially but with Premier league numbers and thus larger financial scope?

    Soup de jour Rodney soup de jour.
    But why would the current owners sell a PL club to someone with no money?

    Roland wanted to get shot of a loss making EFL club, a PL club is far more valuable
  • eastterrace6168
    eastterrace6168 Posts: 22,507
    Covered End said:
    Elthamaddick said:
    J BLOCK said:
    The Burnley fans are now calling us bed wetters and we have no proof that Farnell and co will be bad for their club.

    Football fans are fickle but this is straight up stupidity. Unlucky chaps, you've got a world of trouble coming your way, 
    Let them take over then and we'll sit back and watch...
    This.
    Our fans have contacted their fans and warned them, so it's up to them if they want to listen.
    Agree Covered End, you can only advise so much, based on our previous experience of the whole Farnell and his mates attempts to strip us bare, and after a while you are just wasting your time and energy on what is a lost cause.
    Remember, i would say most of us, were probably of the same opinion as these delude Burnley fans when we first heard of Nimer and his alleged wealth, so at the same time you can sort of understand the reaction to the golden egg being laid at their doorstep, let's just hope the Burnley board are not so easily taken in.
  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,651
    edited November 2020
    killerandflash said:
    LenGlover said:
    Do we know how Burnley is set up?

    We hear about a '£200m turnover' but ESI allegedly took us over for £50m until it all unravelled and we realised that all they actually paid was £1 for the Club and Roland retained the ground etc, etc.

    They then milked us for 'consultancy' and other questionable expenses as we know until it all got exposed.

    Who is to say that the Burnley plan isn't  similar potentially but with Premier league numbers and thus larger financial scope?

    Soup de jour Rodney soup de jour.
    But why would the current owners sell a PL club to someone with no money?

    Roland wanted to get shot of a loss making EFL club, a PL club is far more valuable
    They wouldn't knowingly I doubt but unknowingly who knows?

    EDIT: Here's a link to the relevant thread on Burnley's fans' forum if anyone is interested.

    https://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=49975


  • Leroy Ambrose
    Leroy Ambrose Posts: 14,436
    killerandflash said:
    LenGlover said:
    Do we know how Burnley is set up?

    We hear about a '£200m turnover' but ESI allegedly took us over for £50m until it all unravelled and we realised that all they actually paid was £1 for the Club and Roland retained the ground etc, etc.

    They then milked us for 'consultancy' and other questionable expenses as we know until it all got exposed.

    Who is to say that the Burnley plan isn't  similar potentially but with Premier league numbers and thus larger financial scope?

    Soup de jour Rodney soup de jour.
    But why would the current owners sell a PL club to someone with no money?

    Roland wanted to get shot of a loss making EFL club, a PL club is far more valuable
    They wouldn't. The only reason they got away with it with us is because Roland is a senile lunatic. They're all over Burnley to try and give the veneer of being 'players' so that, when a distressed championship club becomes available, the owners will clutch at straws and 'sell' to them, giving them the opportunity of pulling the same 'fleece and then admin' scam they were in the verge of getting away with here. 
  • golfaddick
    golfaddick Posts: 33,624
    eastterrace6168 said:
    Covered End said:
    Elthamaddick said:
    J BLOCK said:
    The Burnley fans are now calling us bed wetters and we have no proof that Farnell and co will be bad for their club.

    Football fans are fickle but this is straight up stupidity. Unlucky chaps, you've got a world of trouble coming your way, 
    Let them take over then and we'll sit back and watch...
    This.
    Our fans have contacted their fans and warned them, so it's up to them if they want to listen.
    Agree Covered End, you can only advise so much, based on our previous experience of the whole Farnell and his mates attempts to strip us bare, and after a while you are just wasting your time and energy on what is a lost cause.
    Remember, i would say most of us, were probably of the same opinion as these delude Burnley fans when we first heard of Nimer and his alleged wealth, so at the same time you can sort of understand the reaction to the golden egg being laid at their doorstep, let's just hope the Burnley board are not so easily taken in.
    It's a bit different though isnt it. No-one had heard of Nimer this time last year. If, when it was announced who was behind ESI, a group of fans from Bury or Bolton had said..."here, take a look at what we dug up when they were looking to buy us" and they reveal a dossier which showed a dodgy website & a scam from a few years ago we might have dug a bit deeper & earlier than we did.

    Its not as if we are just throwing mud around because they failed to buy us. 
  • eastterrace6168
    eastterrace6168 Posts: 22,507
    golfaddick said:
    eastterrace6168 said:
    Covered End said:
    Elthamaddick said:
    J BLOCK said:
    The Burnley fans are now calling us bed wetters and we have no proof that Farnell and co will be bad for their club.

    Football fans are fickle but this is straight up stupidity. Unlucky chaps, you've got a world of trouble coming your way, 
    Let them take over then and we'll sit back and watch...
    This.
    Our fans have contacted their fans and warned them, so it's up to them if they want to listen.
    Agree Covered End, you can only advise so much, based on our previous experience of the whole Farnell and his mates attempts to strip us bare, and after a while you are just wasting your time and energy on what is a lost cause.
    Remember, i would say most of us, were probably of the same opinion as these delude Burnley fans when we first heard of Nimer and his alleged wealth, so at the same time you can sort of understand the reaction to the golden egg being laid at their doorstep, let's just hope the Burnley board are not so easily taken in.
    It's a bit different though isnt it. No-one had heard of Nimer this time last year. If, when it was announced who was behind ESI, a group of fans from Bury or Bolton had said..."here, take a look at what we dug up when they were looking to buy us" and they reveal a dossier which showed a dodgy website & a scam from a few years ago we might have dug a bit deeper & earlier than we did.

    Its not as if we are just throwing mud around because they failed to buy us. 
    That's about it, we are trying to give them the benefit of our experience, and they are in an even better position than we were, as we were going into it blind, they are being presented with not only the dossiers, but first hand experience of what could befall them.
    So, whilst i take your point regarding the "we may have reacted better with the dossiers" scenario we didn't have that luxury.
  • soapy_jones
    soapy_jones Posts: 21,350
    Off to have a shandy...

    Feck em!
  • Leroy Ambrose
    Leroy Ambrose Posts: 14,436
    soapy_jones said:
    Off to have a shandy...

    Feck em!
    Benny and hot, surely? 
  • Chris_from_Sidcup
    Chris_from_Sidcup Posts: 36,009
    soapy_jones said:
    Off to have a hand shandy...

    Feck em!
    Too much info!
  • Sponsored links:



  • ProperCharlton
    ProperCharlton Posts: 2,254
    Arsenetatters said:
    PragueAddick said:
    As for the fans, well I understand that our dossiers have reached the Burnley boardroom, so if they do go ahead with Farnell after that, and all the other media questions, then certainly more fool them, but I really doubt it. Being a going concern as a biz, Garlick and co are not under that much pressure to sell.

    Really pleased to see the dossiers are going to be put to good use. Lots of very hard work by all of the team is going to pay off. Once word of their true intention gets about - and I'm sure it will in time - they wont be able to mess up another football club.
     I bet they will
  • J BLOCK
    J BLOCK Posts: 8,309
    Another golden nugget from their forum. If someone wants to articulate a response to this I’m happy to post it. I can’t be arsed with them anymore. I’ll just wait for it to unfold. 

    Grumps wrote: ↑Only banging it, because nobody answers it, and you still haven't. 
    Burnley are not in the same position as Charlton was, not by a long way. 
    Was your club a well run, debt free club when he came in, did he run it into the ground from that position? Did he asset strip the club?
    Or was the club in such a crap state, due to previous owners? Had you reached rock bottom before he arrived?
    As I've said, I haven't seen enough evidence to make a decision either way
  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,651
    edited November 2020
    J BLOCK said:
    Another golden nugget from their forum. If someone wants to articulate a response to this I’m happy to post it. I can’t be arsed with them anymore. I’ll just wait for it to unfold. 

    Grumps wrote: ↑Only banging it, because nobody answers it, and you still haven't. 
    Burnley are not in the same position as Charlton was, not by a long way. 
    Was your club a well run, debt free club when he came in, did he run it into the ground from that position? Did he asset strip the club?
    Or was the club in such a crap state, due to previous owners? Had you reached rock bottom before he arrived?
    As I've said, I haven't seen enough evidence to make a decision either way
    If you can be arsed you could tell them we were sold supposedly for £50m which later transpired to be £1. Who is to say their £200m might not be the same? If you haven't already you could mention that he is the subject of at least TWO SRA investigations and also that  Judge Richard Arnold expressed the opinion in court that Farnell had a conflict of interest during the first injunction case. 
  • charltonbob
    charltonbob Posts: 8,254
    LenGlover said:
    J BLOCK said:
    Another golden nugget from their forum. If someone wants to articulate a response to this I’m happy to post it. I can’t be arsed with them anymore. I’ll just wait for it to unfold. 

    Grumps wrote: ↑Only banging it, because nobody answers it, and you still haven't. 
    Burnley are not in the same position as Charlton was, not by a long way. 
    Was your club a well run, debt free club when he came in, did he run it into the ground from that position? Did he asset strip the club?
    Or was the club in such a crap state, due to previous owners? Had you reached rock bottom before he arrived?
    As I've said, I haven't seen enough evidence to make a decision either way
    If you can be arsed you could tell them we were sold supposedly for £50m which later transpired to be £1. Who is to say their £200m might not be the same? If you haven't already you could mention that he is the subject of at least TWO SRA investigations and also that  Judge Richard Arnold expressed the opinion in court that Farnell had a conflict of interest during the first injunction case. 


    Well there was definitely a conflict of interest acting for the seller & the buyer while blocking all other prospective buyers.
  • EveshamAddick
    EveshamAddick Posts: 7,013
    What’s happening with the ESI court case?
  • LTKapal
    LTKapal Posts: 1,312
    LenGlover said:
    J BLOCK said:
    Another golden nugget from their forum. If someone wants to articulate a response to this I’m happy to post it. I can’t be arsed with them anymore. I’ll just wait for it to unfold. 

    Grumps wrote: ↑Only banging it, because nobody answers it, and you still haven't. 
    Burnley are not in the same position as Charlton was, not by a long way. 
    Was your club a well run, debt free club when he came in, did he run it into the ground from that position? Did he asset strip the club?
    Or was the club in such a crap state, due to previous owners? Had you reached rock bottom before he arrived?
    As I've said, I haven't seen enough evidence to make a decision either way
    If you can be arsed you could tell them we were sold supposedly for £50m which later transpired to be £1. Who is to say their £200m might not be the same? If you haven't already you could mention that he is the subject of at least TWO SRA investigations and also that  Judge Richard Arnold expressed the opinion in court that Farnell had a conflict of interest during the first injunction case. 
    Don't forget that the £1 hadn't been paid
  • J BLOCK
    J BLOCK Posts: 8,309
    Henry Irving said:
    In response.

    Yes, Charlton were in a mess from previous owners, that is not disputed.

    But distressed clubs are the weakest and the most vulnerable to the unscrupulous. 

    Farnell got involved in the way a vulture gets involved with a dying animal.

    Despite supposedly acting for the club he deliberately blocked potential purchasers Andrew Barclay (of the billionaire Barclay family) and eventual buyer Thomas Sandgaard.

    Instead he introduced his friend Paul Elliot in a clear conflict of interest that has resulted in two complaints to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority and a public reprimand from a high court judge.

    Farnell publicly named El Kashasky as part of the consortium buying Charlton.

    Yet we now learn EL K and Farnel were said to be buying Burnley at the same time.

    Farnell and Elliot with El K were unable to past the EFLs OADT or provide proof of funds to run a league one club yet we are now told El K is worth £9bn.

    We Addicks are relieved that Farnell, El K and Elliot are no longer involved with our club and hope that none of them get near any other club.
    Top Banana HI - Have posted 
  • Sponsored links:



  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,219
    J BLOCK said:
    Henry Irving said:
    In response.

    Yes, Charlton were in a mess from previous owners, that is not disputed.

    But distressed clubs are the weakest and the most vulnerable to the unscrupulous. 

    Farnell got involved in the way a vulture gets involved with a dying animal.

    Despite supposedly acting for the club he deliberately blocked potential purchasers Andrew Barclay (of the billionaire Barclay family) and eventual buyer Thomas Sandgaard.

    Instead he introduced his friend Paul Elliot in a clear conflict of interest that has resulted in two complaints to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority and a public reprimand from a high court judge.

    Farnell publicly named El Kashasky as part of the consortium buying Charlton.

    Yet we now learn EL K and Farnel were said to be buying Burnley at the same time.

    Farnell and Elliot with El K were unable to past the EFLs OADT or provide proof of funds to run a league one club yet we are now told El K is worth £9bn.

    We Addicks are relieved that Farnell, El K and Elliot are no longer involved with our club and hope that none of them get near any other club.
    Top Banana HI - Have posted 
    Let us know what the response is @j_block
  • MattF
    MattF Posts: 3,797
  • clive
    clive Posts: 19,451
    https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/content/club-statement-club-takeover
  • SE7toSG3
    SE7toSG3 Posts: 3,140
    That statement is the first hint that its not a straight forward 'Billionaire buys Burnley' story as the truth unravels and Farnell reality bites 
  • cafcfan1990
    cafcfan1990 Posts: 12,811
    Henry Irving said:
    In response.

    Yes, Charlton were in a mess from previous owners, that is not disputed.

    But distressed clubs are the weakest and the most vulnerable to the unscrupulous. 

    Farnell got involved in the way a vulture gets involved with a dying animal.

    Despite supposedly acting for the club he deliberately blocked potential purchasers Andrew Barclay (of the billionaire Barclay family) and eventual buyer Thomas Sandgaard.

    Instead he introduced his friend Paul Elliot in a clear conflict of interest that has resulted in two complaints to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority and a public reprimand from a high court judge.

    Farnell publicly named El Kashasky as part of the consortium buying Charlton.

    Yet we now learn EL K and Farnel were said to be buying Burnley at the same time.

    Farnell and Elliot with El K were unable to past the EFLs OADT or provide proof of funds to run a league one club yet we are now told El K is worth £9bn.

    We Addicks are relieved that Farnell, El K and Elliot are no longer involved with our club and hope that none of them get near any other club.
    So you're saying if they buy Burnley you'll be gutted it's not us?
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,219
    cafcfan1990 said:
    Henry Irving said:
    In response.

    Yes, Charlton were in a mess from previous owners, that is not disputed.

    But distressed clubs are the weakest and the most vulnerable to the unscrupulous. 

    Farnell got involved in the way a vulture gets involved with a dying animal.

    Despite supposedly acting for the club he deliberately blocked potential purchasers Andrew Barclay (of the billionaire Barclay family) and eventual buyer Thomas Sandgaard.

    Instead he introduced his friend Paul Elliot in a clear conflict of interest that has resulted in two complaints to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority and a public reprimand from a high court judge.

    Farnell publicly named El Kashasky as part of the consortium buying Charlton.

    Yet we now learn EL K and Farnel were said to be buying Burnley at the same time.

    Farnell and Elliot with El K were unable to past the EFLs OADT or provide proof of funds to run a league one club yet we are now told El K is worth £9bn.

    We Addicks are relieved that Farnell, El K and Elliot are no longer involved with our club and hope that none of them get near any other club.
    So you're saying if they buy Burnley you'll be gutted it's not us?
    Yes, Sandgaard Out, El K in
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,304
    clive said:
    https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/content/club-statement-club-takeover
    But I thought El Kashashy was on the verge of buying the club??? 
  • ct_addick
    ct_addick Posts: 4,333
    I would say there are more assets to strip at Burnley than us....Farnell must be rubbing his hands in anticipation 
  • Cafc43v3r
    Cafc43v3r Posts: 21,600
    ct_addick said:
    I would say there are more assets to strip at Burnley than us....Farnell must be rubbing his hands in anticipation 
    But its going to cost him £200 large to find out...... 

Categories

“Marketplace”