[Archived] Rovers Sold ??

[EwoodGlory]

It's basically sounds like a gamble, and if thats the case I don't want anybody to gamble with the clubs future and would rather stay as we are.

I fear the league is going to be ruined by people out to make a 'fast buck'

[John]

From what I have read (so far), I don't really see how we would be better off with Daniel Williams as owner.

[B'burn End Row 10 Seat 160]

Can i just add my two penneth! I am highly sceptical of this takeover! I qoute "These aren't people who are going to spend £10 million on a player almost Abramovich-like." Abramovich spends £20+ on players (Essien, Drogba & Sheva). The new takeovers such as the eggman and lerner are both poised to splash far more than £10million on one player! So is this really a takeover that will allow us to compete. No doubting Sparky will be able to do better with less but we are surely at a stage were a few additions of real quality are more important than a couple of £1 million plus players to build a big squad! If he is not prepared to spend £10million then that almost certainly rules out the return of Bellers!

Only positive too come out of that interview is that no major changes to the current structure. Which implies the safety of the loyal JW!

[Ozz]

Kamy's LET Article on Daniel Williams

Are Kamy and Andy Neild the same person?

[Cocker]

Are Kamy and Andy Neild the same person?

And if so, which one is Clark Kent and which one is Superman?

[WelshRed]

And if so, which one is Clark Kent and which one is Superman?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...ers/6748019.stm

[yoda]

For all the people who think we should stay as we are THE TRUST DO NOT WANT US ANYMORE, its time to move on, JW should and I am sure he will, get the best deal available

[B'burn End Row 10 Seat 160]

For all the people who think we should stay as we are THE TRUST DO NOT WANT US ANYMORE, its time to move on, JW should and I am sure he will, get the best deal available

We don't have too settle for the first person that comes along just because he heralds from somewhere remotely close, has a little cash and has been to 3 games in a season surely???

[modes98]

Are Kamy and Andy Neild the same person?

No the one he wrote about silly!

Not that Modes98 Management can confirm or deny that Kamy is or isn't Clark Kent or indeed Superman, but he is Super Ted!

[JamieUK]

I picked up on the £10m player quote too. If this guy does want us to 'finish in the top 7 and qualify for Europe' every year then the way the market is going, and the teams around us improving their squads, we may need to pay this amount to compete. The way he's talking sounds no improvement on what we have at the moment. :s

[yoda]

-->

QUOTE(B @ Jun 19 2007, 13:39 ) 520178[/snapback]

We don't have too settle for the first person that comes along just because he heralds from somewhere remotely close, has a little cash and has been to 3 games in a season surely???

some people cannot read on this site, I suggested that JW will get the best deal available, again the trust do not want Blackburn Rovers anymore!

[philipl]

For all the people who think we should stay as we are THE TRUST DO NOT WANT US ANYMORE, its time to move on, JW should and I am sure he will, get the best deal available

Legally and therefore ultimately in reality, the Trust does not have an opinion, only a duty to fulfil the terms of the Trust the Trustees are appointed to administer.

Enough has been written by those reported to be in the know that Jack did think in terms of how to handle a situation where there was a new Jack Walker. No doubt Rothschilds and some Trust law specialists are advising the Trustees, the Trust's other beneficiaries (besides Rovers) and the Rovers board very carefully.

The EPL is attracting a lot of investors whom we all know will want their return on investment. Nobody knows for sure that 100% of the broadcasting money increase will go into wages and leaky pockets yet- when that has happened the craze for buying EPL clubs will die, at least amongst the Americans unless the global marketing hype shows more substance than bubble.

Right now, the Trust is simply fulfilling a part of the Trust Agreement which presumably obliges them to seek alternative ownership in such propitious circumstances as exist now.

Whether these alternatives match other stipulations set by Jack is the £64 million (or thereabouts) question.

[yoda]

is there an echo in here

the trust owns the club, if the trust did not want to sell there would not be all this speculation

[B'burn End Row 10 Seat 160]

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(B @ Jun 19 2007, 13:39 ) 520178[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->We don't have too settle for the first person that comes along just because he heralds from somewhere remotely close, has a little cash and has been to 3 games in a season surely???

some people cannot read on this site, I suggested that JW will get the best deal available, again the trust do not want Blackburn Rovers anymore!

you actually implied some hesitancy if you wish to read your oringinal statement in that you said first he should. I have no questions over the capabilites of jw whereas you suggest otherwise!

[Uddersfelt Blue]

Being a Rovers fan makes me naturally pessimistic but the way this guy is talking worries me to death.

You don't have to be an accountant to understand that most football clubs don't make money. The only profit for the investors in such a takeover will be from the TV money. That reduces the amount available for players, lower ticket prices etc.

If the Trust want to sell the club it must be to someone who can add value to what is there already. Without that then we are in no better position (or possibly much worse).

[pleasure]

is there an echo in here

the trust owns the club, if the trust did not want to sell there would not be all this speculation

exactly, for ages we've heard that JW was looking for extra backing, but the real issue to me was that the trust were looking to sell us asap.

that's my opinion.

i'm sceptical about the williams' takeover.

i initially thought that he'd be selling off he assets and pumping the cash into rovers. relying on other members of a consortium unsettles me.

[yoda]

-->

QUOTE(B @ Jun 19 2007, 14:03 ) 520191[/snapback]

you actually implied some hesitancy if you wish to read your oringinal statement in that you said first he should. I have no questions over the capabilites of jw whereas you suggest otherwise!

i actually said "JW should and I am sure he will, get the best deal available "

at no point have i said the suitor being talked about is the best deal that could be obtained, like all good businesses, you have to trust the management to make the correct decisions, thats what they are paid to do,

Blackburn Rovers is a good and well managed business and is probably a more attractive proposition than a lot of people realise. In the hands of a global marketing expert the fortunes could be transformed. The Chinese market for example is going to be huge in the coming years, and they are very interested in the EPL.

I have had to take Rovers shirts to China on numerous occasions!

[Claytons Left Boot]

For the first 20 years of my working life I was employed in the finance industry and I have got to say I am a little uneasy about this particular take over possibility.

When you assess any business proposition, before you get to the stage of considering security/collateral available, interpreting audited information, business plans, cash flow etc etc, you get a gut feeling and my gut feeling here isn't too good.

Sometimes you 'lend to the man' which is where the business venture is not considered that viable but because of the track record and history of the individual(s) concerned you feel he/they will be able to make it a success. Sometimes you do it the other way round. Ideally you would want good individuals and a good proposition.

Obviously we only have info in front of us from the LT and there may be anomalies we don't know about, but there does not appear to be anything of any substance behind Mr Williams. He has a recruitment company for graduates, namely Elite Graduate Jobs and a property business, namely Princetown Global Housing. The latter seems to have been set up fairly recently and whilst it has secured (only) its second contract for $750m and has two contracts totalling around $1b (£500m), this is not profit or net worth, it's just contract value, and until the houses are fully built it is just land.

The flip side of the above is that you don't just acquire contracts of that size without either having some connections or considerable funding of your own.

With regard to the consortium he says he has tried to find investors who are in it for the long term and who are looking for a long term stable investment but at the same time he admits they are not at the point where they have any long term plans? What?! About to spend anything up to say £60m, possibly more, and you have no long term plans?

On the player front we are told that there will not be any Abramovich style spending and I do not think anyone would expect that. That's sensible enough but we are also told they would not want to spend £10m on one player which to me is rather depressing. I would like to think that if we were being taken over by 'very, very large investment institutions' we would be able to buy say two £10m players and a couple at £5m, subject to them being in MH's plans and available. It's good to be cautious but come on! Not considering one £10m player is barely one step up from where we are now.

Finally, one of the bullet points was that Rovers would not be in debt. Assuming the bid is say £60m and they could inject £20m themselves. Who would service a borrowing of £40m? Whilst it may not be in the name of Blackburn Rovers, any loans would have to be repaid from the Rovers' commercial revenue or would these investors repay from the goodness of their hearts.

Whilst I want the best for Blackburn Rovers and certainly feel the time is right for a takeover to prevent us from being left behind, this does not stack up for me. I hope there are other factors that have not been mentioned that will prove me wrong.

[tcj_jones]

As far as I am aware, Williams is a very rich man indeed. The trustees want to sell, but are bound by the terms of the trust. Williams and his consortium are one of "several" groups looking to purchase the club. Therefore, I'd say the trustees are not looking to sell to the first bidder.

Further to that, we have very intelligent men at the top and any premiership club is going to be paying extremely good and expensive lawyers to oversee this. If Williams is this shoddy businessman that people are making him out to be, then they will know this already and way before we do. In fact, they'd have shown him the door before now.

Maybe the consortium are providing huge backing for the deal, but if Williams is fronting the bid then surely he would be hold the majority of the club in the future.

We also have to remember that he is a fan. If I were a venture capitalist, there is no way I would sacrifice the future of my club to make money. I doubt he would be any different.

I'm still nervous about this deal, but am confident that this will work out well.

[RevidgeBlue]

Excellent scoop from Andy Neild. (Although I'd have asked him why Williams' website states he has already acquired the club for 100m dollars in Spring 07)

Much better reporting from the LT generally since the complaints.

Williams makes a lot of the right noises in the interview particularly where he says the way to make a club valuable is to finish in the top seven and Europe every year. However it is plain from what he says that his investors would require steady if unspectacular profit year on year and that just isn't what Rovers (or 99% of any other football clubs for that matter) can produce.

Also if anything does happen it's plain it won't be concluded until the end of the transfer window - it would be the same for any other would be investor - where does that leave our summer transfer budget?

Possibly gives himself away at the end when he says that they won't be splashing Abramovich type amounts like 10m about. Hardly Abramovich type spending and if they can't do that they're not going to take us onto the next level.

Can't see anything coming of it but it depends how badly the trustees want to sell.

[John]

I could write a lot on this but I will keep it short – points below.

1. He seems to think BRFC can a profit

2. He says we would not pay £10 million for one player yet says Hughes will be given ‘substantial funds’ for new players

3. He talks about Blackburn as a purely business venture, not referring to how he thinks with sensible backing he could see Hughes-led Blackburn team challenge the top 4

Ultimately this deal will come down to the pedigree of his financial backers (financial institutions).

On another note, we are not getting linked with buying any players and any takeover would take place too late in August I think - I do wonder if Hughes is frustrated at this.

It is going to be a long summer…….

[John]

Venture - good or bad? The basic view

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/680910.stm

[Jimbo]

Yet another leveraged buy out - He'll put up a few bob with most of his funds coming as debt which will Rovers will be saddled with. I fail to see how this can be welcomed by any Rovers supporter.

[modes98]

He'll put up a few bob with most of his funds coming as debt which will Rovers will be saddled with.

The one thing I think it's important to stress is there would be no debt going on the club as part of this deal.

[BrianPotter]

Yet another leveraged buy out - He'll put up a few bob with most of his funds coming as debt which will Rovers will be saddled with. I fail to see how this can be welcomed by any Rovers supporter.

My understanding is that if this were the case then the Trustees would not sell, even if they wanted to, as there are certain sanctions in place to protect the future of the club.

A takeover of a club where 99.8% of the shares are owned by a single entity should be more straightforward than most, however what makes things more complicated in our case is the fact that the sole entity is a trust put in place by our late owner, who set in stone certain sanctions to ensure the future of the club. Whilst the people in charge of this trust may have there own ideas of what they would like to do, the fact is that the structure of Jacks will / trust means that their hands will be somewhat tied to what they can actually do / not do.

I honestly don't think the club will be sold unless the interested party meets some very strict requirements.