John Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 With this quote I guess we can put our dream of Paul Allen to rest Oh well Gutted....
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Beta Ray Bill Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Sky Sports also reporting Fun to see West Ham's influence over all things football is spreading to Rovers as well. The Premiership club confirmed on Wednesday that they are currently in talks with a third party about a possible takeover at Upton Park.
John Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Paul Allen would have been too good to be true - he is seriously wealthy... Oh well let the guessing game continue - looks like we are only making one signing this summer, so this may prove to be more interesting.
tcj_jones Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Living in London, my main concern, from a practical point of view, is the increased cost of tickets. My travel up to Blackburn always surpasses the ticket costs. Our remarkably cheap tickets have meant that I can still watch Rovers on a regular basis. However, if prices were to increase considerably, I don't think I could afford to go to so many games. Although, with our current attendances, I don't think a billionaire businessmen would be silly enough to alienate more fans through a massive ticket cost increase.
Florida Rover Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 So do you all really think we will be under new ownership by August as the Mirror suggested?
brfc fan Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 With this quote I guess we can put our dream of Paul Allen to rest Oh well He might change his mind. Or the actual person/s wanting to buy the club might be better.
Cocker Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 He might change his mind. Or the actual person/s wanting to buy the club might be better. Yeah, this could be like when one of our players says "No, I wont be going anywhere. I am a Blackburn Rovers player and I will be next year" The next day they are off :ph34r:
thenodrog Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Sorry to be back on topic but my thought is around how the Trust rules are written. I assume Uncle Jack had some thoughts about the future and what covenants would be in place should circumstances require the Trust shareholding to be passed to another owner. If there are no covenants I would still expect the current trustees to follow Jack's plan to secure the Rovers future to the extent they can. I get a bad feeling about this. The way the money is coming into then Prem we are beggared if we do and beggared if we dont. We need big investment simply to keep up with the other clubs BUT..... 1. Why would anybody aim to take BRFC on in order to make money? The Walker Trust would have the clout and incentive to do that on their own surely? They know all the ropes and have proved in the past that if there is money to be made they are quite capable of exploiting situations themselves. 2. We are probably most valuable to an asset stripper. 3. Taking off my blue tinted glasses I'm suspicious.
Eddie Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Basically all football clubs are most valuable as an asset stripper, it's true of most sports teams. Investors will know what they are getting into and as of yet we haven't seen anything like that happen. If people with this sort of money wanted to make a quick buck there are far easier and less public ways to do it.
Paul Mellelieu Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 For once I completely agree with 'drog. It's a mystery to me why anyone, other than a fan would want to take the helm.
Flopsy Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 unless they start saying how important it is for us to move to Milton Keynes, I'm willing to give people who arent deposed dodgy ex prime ministers of Thailand the time to see what they're offering
Jimbo Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Wimbledon proved that the FA is toothless with regards to franchising football with their move to Milton Keynes - With more and more Americans showing interest in Premier league clubs, how long before we see NFL style franchising where clubs are moved city to city at the owners whim and where they can make the fastest buck - As Flopsy I only see bad thing happening to Rovers if they move out of control of the Walker Trust.
SIMON GARNERS 194 Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 unless they start saying how important it is for us to move to Milton Keynes, I'm willing to give people who arent deposed dodgy ex prime ministers of Thailand the time to see what they're offering The most sensible thing to do Flopsy.I am sure the Walker trust etc will not sell to any flurkin idiot like a Risdale so lets see whats on the table first and foremost. WE PRAY
Exiled in Toronto Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Allow me. I have consistently said that new ownership would be a good thing and that it will happen sooner rather than later, so I for one am delighted at the recent news. All the signs are that the Trust do want to sell, and since they will know their terms of reference in intimate detail, as opposed to the complete ignorance of everyone on here, we can only assume that their hands are not as bound as some would have had us believe. Until the news broke, I have to admit that I was, for the first time in forty years, not looking forwards to the new season. I am sick and tired of the whole charade that is the Premier League. Now that I am pumped again, I realise that I was sick of being in a league where we had no chance of progressing to the next level - survival does not make for a great spectator sport. Sport for me is all about the hope that one can get better and move up the ladder, and new ownership gives me that hope. The trust gave us (in recent years) careful stewardship, and it's now time for both parties to move on.
gazsimm Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 It IS the only long term solution. Maybe some yank would have the acumen, wherewithall and clout (and distant location ) to pull it off! you can stick your lancashire united up your backside, that will be the end of me watching football
Hughesy Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Anyone else got any news on who the takeover could be by then, now that Allen has declared it is not him!? It has been reported it is a major US investor, but the question is who?? How about Bill Gates?
heapbag Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Seeing as how people are just randomly pulling names out of their ass of any rich American they that have ever heard of, here is a link to the Forbes 400 Richest Americans: Forbes I'm going to throw in the name Kirk Kerkorian while I'm at it.
krislu Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 I'm going to throw in the name Kirk Kerkorian while I'm at it. An 89-year old? With all respect, he will be resting before Roves win any silver..
OJRovers Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 I think the most interesting thing to come out of this is that we know that the current owners (the Trust) WANT TO SELL - then as far as I'm concerned we should find a new owner. If they want to sell, they are not going to give MH any more money than they contractually have to to buy new players. Maybe the interest in Rovers was mainly from Jack Walker, because i'm sure if he were alive he wouldn't want out of the club. So Lets get owners who actually want to own Rovers and not those looking for an exit strategy.
Hughesy Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 OJ i agree 100%. The trust do not want our club! If Uncle Jack was here, then no way in this world would we be sold, and he would of backed us with much more finance. Im sure that he will be turning in his grave at the fact that they havent really given us anything more than what they have too, but like you say, its time to move on, lets get owners that actually want to bring success, rather than just doing what they have to because of a will!! Onwards and upwards!
Eddie Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 I think the most interesting thing to come out of this is that we know that the current owners (the Trust) WANT TO SELL - then as far as I'm concerned we should find a new owner. If they want to sell, they are not going to give MH any more money than they contractually have to to buy new players. Maybe the interest in Rovers was mainly from Jack Walker, because i'm sure if he were alive he wouldn't want out of the club. So Lets get owners who actually want to own Rovers and not those looking for an exit strategy. I think they realise that there is a good possibility of finding someone who can give the club more money and that is why they are interested in selling the club. I don't think they want to sell to the degree that they would be unhappy if they still have it, far from it, but they know that the club could benefit from the right person taking over.
OJRovers Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 True - I suppose then, if Jack Walker's representatives think its good for the club - then we should support them because maybe that's what Jack would think.
SIMON GARNERS 194 Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Agree with you Oj, its quite clear the remaining Walkers want out once and for all but whatever happens they have been good to this club. Time to move on.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.