They only survived because the Davies Family took another huge hit through their trust so that Anderson didn't. After Rovers' experience of Jack's family utterly resenting his involvement with Rovers, Bolton can be immensely grateful to Davies and all his family.

sorry repeat post

The strategies were written by the consultants in the summer of 2017 and seem to have been adhered to. So no you won't see any difference until their next strategic review which would probably come around 2022 unless something completely unexpected happens. For what its worth, I think if you watch is happening and being said, the strategy is aiming for promotion in 20/21 to the Premier League with the fundamentals of a squad capable of staying up.

Yes Strategy. The £500K plus spent on consultants in the close season of 2016/17 will have given them a strategic bible for Rovers which it would appear they are adhering to.

In the absence of the injured Aderarbaiyo, Brereton, Butterworth and Davenport, the team picks itself (Samuel and Gladwin obviously not deemed ready yet either): Walton, Bennett, Lenihan, Williams, Cunningham, Travis, Johnson, Downing, Dack, Gallagher, Graham. Nyambe and Bell improved but didn't do enough to force back into contention while Rothwell equally hasn't shown enough when on the park while Armstrong is at least 50% liability. Would like to see Rankin-Cistello and Buckley get game time off the bench. Both are going to be big players for us, quite possibly this season. Like Cardiff, let's assume this is a top 6 6 pointer so we have to avoid defeat. Back to clean sheets please. We have too much going forward to remain scoreless- the stats for shots on target are improving.

If you look at number 5 on that list, you can probably see the Venky's strategy.

Sheffield United v Sunderland if only both results had been reversed...

Stewart Day rightly gets completely trashed by the Financial Times this morning. https://www.ft.com/content/5f185398-c9a6-11e9-a1f4-3669401ba76f?segmentId=a7371401-027d-d8bf-8a7f-2a746e767d56

Seen the highlights. Horribly let down by two goal keeper foul ups and a penalty kick as bad as they come.

A huge amount of inaccurate stuff about Rovers on this thread. I wish fans would have taken as much interest in 2011 and 2012. Glad Gigg Lane is covenanted which leaves me wondering what the heck Blackburn lad Stewart Day ever thought he was doing there.

Bolton administration suspending winding up. Staff jobs safe for time being.

At face value... Stewart Day had sold the stadium which has a debt on it of around £3.7m. The interest charged, eye watering. He had sold car parking spaces, around 250 of them, at £10,000 a pop. Without a deal to settle these liabilities there was no hope. So that’s £6.2m A tweet from Andy Holt who was helping C&N due diligence into Bury. Blackburnian Day is emerging as the true villain in this story it would appear.

From the stats we totally bossed that one. Shame stupid mistakes let us down so badly. As the BBC wrote about their goals "Poor from Blackburn"

The problem with this is that what should be our regular back 4 are being taken apart by a bunch of reserves.

Well, a number of players are making a determined bid to be excluded from any future 18.

And Armstrong cannot score

Rovers penalty won by Dack

Sheff U ten changes but still a formidable line-up.

Statement by C&N, the frustrated bidders for Bury. In other words, Bury is an unmitigated disastrous mess which nobody could disentangle sensibly. It seems as though all kinds of additional problems surfaced in the closing due diligence.

David Conn BREAKING: Bury FC Crisis: The proposed purchase by C & N Sporting Risk is OFF; owner Steve Dale was given until 5pm today for it to complete or the club would be expelled from the Football League, so this really could be the end.

Anyone's guess. There are undoubtedly poison pills in the equation otherwise the Administrator would have cleared previous ownerships out of the picture by now. Chances of a deal have gone from close to zero to around 50% for any rescue. FV remain in the driving seat but there is clearly something in the deal which is beyond their pain threshhold or otherwise they would have done the deal by now. If the new bidder prevails, the League are going to have to extend their deadline because there is no way the paperwork can be read through, checked and executed in a day no matter how well prepared they are. Inevitably with the level of complexities involved the two deals on offer will not be carbon copies with different names on the top. A lot of people will be trying to compare apples and pears at the moment. If one deal is obviously the better, then the person offering that deal is over paying.

The administrator said only one bidder met all the requirements. That was then, this is now. Administrator is legally obliged to talk to everyone who shows interest. They usually deter tire kickers by charging a fee- typically a few thousands- to give access to the sale prospectus.

New bidders are alleged to have shown proof of funds of £33m. As I keep explaining, they will have done 99% of the necessary work in private IF they are serious. I saw a £55bn corporate take over hijacked in a week by similar means. The fact all is currently quiet at both clubs means serious talking is happening.

Money is money. Why take on a £7m obligation when with extreme brinkmanship you can probably duck it? The Administrator's announcements at the weekend were clearly dancing to the Football Ventures' tune. This latest one is much more neutral. As for the second bidder. If they are for real, they will have done a huge amount of work thus far but again will only be showing their hand at the 59th minute of the 11th hour when all else is exhausted.

Appears another bidder with proof of £33m has come in for Bolton. With two bidding the future for Bolton looks a lot brighter. Bury on the other hand...