[Archived] Rovers Sold ??

[92er]

Are you referring to Lawrence Cotton 92er?

"King Cotton" as he was known. The Jack Walker of the early twentieth century, although was far more interested in the town itself than Uncle Jack ever was, becoming mayor and so on.

Yes. I had forgotten his name!

But, like Uncle Jack, he should not be forgotten.

[krislu]

Patachute money is the payment given to relegated clubs for 2 season immediately after relegation, from next season this is almost £10m per annum.

Ok, I did not know that.

[yoda]

Sorry, but this is nonsense FourLaneBlue! Everyone keep talking about the TV money as it is something that a new investor could just put in his pocket and make a profit. If you think our current owners are going to sell the club at a price where the new TV-deal is not "baked" in, then you don't know what you are talking about. And what is this "parachute money" you talk about?

May I suggest a basic course in Corporate Finance...

By "baked" in, do you mean cooking the books?

It would be relatively easy for a new owner to pay a few million over the odds on transfers and for it to end up in a Swiss or off-shore account for use at a later date.

The more you know about corporate finance, the easier it is to swindle the company

With new owners you start from scratch :ph34r:

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Change can be good but the club has to be very careful just who is allowed to have responsibility for the future of this 132 year old club.

That statement just about sums up all our hopes and fears FLB,with the recent news in the LET it does appear that without doubt something is happening at boardroom level.We have been very fortunate that since the involvement of the Walker family some 15 years ago now Rovers have been a very stable club on all levels, it only takes one Peter Risdale or Ken Bates figure to do real damage to years of progressive good work here at Ewood.

We only have to look at one club tonight,Leeds Utd,to see the dire consequences of bad management both on and off the field of play........from Champions league to Cheltenham.

We wait with baited breath.

[ihateburnley]

I keep saying that isn't all about money in football.

Look at the Premiership and you would quickly summarise that the clubs who spend the most win the most. This is complete and utter cack. Second-placed Chelsea's squad cost roughly £242m to assemble, whilst first-placed Manchester United's cost £133.3m. Fifth-placed Bolton's squad cost just £14.4m (less than half of the price of Shevchenko), whilst relegation zone West Ham's squad was assembled for £35.8m.

Incidentally, the combined cost of the Reading and Bolton squads cost less than our very own Rovers squad - and they are both above us in the league table. The cost of Wigan's, West Ham's and Charlton's squads (who occupy the 17th, 18th and 19th positions) add up to £87.9m, whilst you add up the cost of Bolton's, Everton's and Portsmouth's squads (who hold 5th, 6th and 7th) and you get only £83.7m.

And you're not telling me that Newcastle United's squad costing £76.4m (more than three times our spend) is three times as better as the squad that Souness/Hughes have assembled?

It's not just about spending money in football - it's about how you spend it, and where you spend it.

[philipl]

Time Magazine's view of the Premiership

[trueblue]

Someone should ask this Football Dynamics Asia (consultants) how we get asian bums on seats at Ewood

[vyeo]

In my previous post on this topic, I said I belong to the camp where I'm not against a takeover provided the 'right' investor is found. My concern then was that we do not fall into the hands of an opportunist, and I still stand by it. Having thought it over however, I find myself increasingly falling into the camp which would loathe a takeover. Why?

The well-documented takeovers (Chelski, Man U, Portsmouth, Villa, West Ham and lately Liverpool) have all come on the back of foreign investors who are that. Perhaps with the exception of Abramovich and Gaydamuk, I would say the others are all looking at it as a business, ie: they wish to turn a profit. Also, the income gap between the top 4 and the everybody else is clearly increasing. This as a topic has been well-discussed, and it is clear that we belong to the 'everybody else' group. The conundrum then is whether our potential investor(s) is/are rich enough, and willing to invest to the extent that we break the quadropoly. Somehow, I doubt it.

Another argument may then go that amongst the 'everybody else' group, further stratification may appear. This will take the form of the rich vs the poor clubs. The former will comprise clubs like Spurs, Newcastle and now Villa while the compartively poorer would be the Boltons and Readings. Where we stand is probably somewhere in between. Yet, it is clear that money is not always the main player behind the success for such clubs. We have clearly outperformed many of them over the last decade, and this year as well. To pick up on Ihateburnley's point then, perhaps it really is "not just about spending money in football; its about how you spend it, and where". With our limited resources, wise spending has brought us 2 cup semi-finals, 1 good european run and 1 top six finish. With considerably vaster resources, what have Spurs or Newcastle bought? My point then is that with the accumulated 'capital' possessed by the quadropoly, it makes it that much harder for any club outside them to break into this group and in the process relegate one of them from their elite position. The accumulated advantage has also been well discussed; increased income, increased exposure, ability to pay for better players and better staff results in consistently better performances and results. It is almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. This has then resulted in many lamenting the predictability of outcomes, and subsequently becoming disinterested in football.

Here on the board, we already see such disenchantment occuring. Paul has written publicly and quite extensively on his feelings in this regard, and I venture that some form of alienation is occuring amongst football fans as a whole. The issues of pricing, footballers' wages and the cycle of accumulated advantages have all come together to generate this feeling of disenchantment amongst football fans, who are increasingly alienated from what they used to know and love. How then does this link back to the takeover?

We have to therefore look beyond the surface. Despite never having set foot in Lancashire (as yet), BRFC as club has always given me a homely feeling. I cannot pinpoint any reason, but it is a feeling I get. Perhaps because we are physically bounded by our location and must be a small town club. A corollary of Uncle Jack's policies, we have since the inception of the premiership tried to buy British whenever possible; this perhaps is one reason contributing to this feeling of homeliness. (Eg: French players like Perez who can't take the cold cannot assimilate. Yet you can't help but wonder, would Zidane have?) Also, we always seem to do things the right way. We don't moan much to the press, we don't do our business in public, and we still reward our players fairly. The latest initiative of slashing season ticket prices is perhaps the best example of this desire to 'do the right thing'.

Compared to the Arsenals, Chelseas, Liverpools and Man Us, we are then clearly different not only on the playing field and in terms of resources, but also in terms of make-up; the altruistic, the spirit of the club. We are like the local trattoria, still serving up hearty homecooked dishes in an environment where the fanciful restaurants serving up molecular gastronomy dishes are much more revered; we're like a little boutique hotel standing against the Westins and Shangri-La's.

The question regarding this potential takeover then is, how will it alter the club? Are we prepared to trade these altruistic elements and instead succumb to the instrumental rationality of a profit-driven businessman? Of course, we all know that what sets Uncle Jack apart from the rest is that he was first and foremost, a fan. That is perhaps the key difference. To sell the club to a non-fan then would invariably lead to some form of erosion of what BRFC has come to epitomise. One cannot help but relate to the Manchester United fans; have their alienation not been well-documented? Yes they are a well-oiled and famous machine, but who's really happy? A significant segment have been so alienated that they have set up a new football club to 'reclaim' the traditional spirits and what their team used to symbolise. (How's United FC doing anyway?)

To conclude then, I must refer to Philip's excellent posts. He has been consistent over the years in always articulating his opinion that Uncle Jack must have inserted protectionary clauses safe-guarding the club's ownership and terms of sale. His financial analyses have also not only helped us (the numerically-challenged ones) make sense of the club's finances, which have been shown to be thoroughly healthy, but also proven that the trust has indeed contributed to the club in a significant fashion. Yet, there are some who feel that the actual figures are not enough, and of this I am guilty. I have found myself lamenting at times, why can't we have a Gibson, Daniel Levy or even Freddy Shepherd-like (say what you may of Shepherd, but i think as far as generosity in terms of funding is concerned, he cannot be faulted) character to pump in obscene amounts of money and have us competing like we did in the early 90s? The fact is, we used to have such a character in Uncle Jack. However, he has since departed; we cannot expect the trustees to do likewise. Perhaps the real lament is, if only his descendants have a similar love for the club. But in any case, what we do have is an excellent team, from John Williams in the boardroom and Mark Hughes on the field and we have arguably done as well as we could. The past decade and a bit (including relegation) has been a wonderful ride for me, for what are ups without downs in life? Beyond the financial profile, the 'right' person therefore, must first and foremost be a fan. If philip's opinion is right, and I sure hope he is, I can only add, that I wish the clause specifies that BRFC can be sold only to another fan.

[FourLaneBlue]

Ok, I did not know that.

May I suggest a basic course in Football Finance...

[American]

Other noteworthy points: fellas selling large plastic glasses during the match and apart from the two "ends" complete mixing of supporters form the two clubs. And not one drink-fuelled bit of aggro. So if they can do it, what's wrong with our supporters?

Went to Dortmund today and noticed the same thing. Even had a husband/wife sitting next to me each supporting a different side.

[RevidgeBlue]

To conclude then, I must refer to Philip's excellent posts. He has been consistent over the years in always articulating his opinion that Uncle Jack must have inserted protectionary clauses safe-guarding the club's ownership and terms of sale.

As is usually the case philip is indulging in pure speculation in expressing that view, he doesn't know any better than you or me whether that was the case and recent events would tend to indicate that that was patently not the case.

However the Trustees are subject to a general fiduciary duty imposed by law. That combined with their previous excellent track record, and the fact there is no urgent need to sell thanks to the new TV deal, should give rise to optimism that if or when a sale does occur, it will be in the club's overall interests.

[philipl]

Sorry Revidge, you are wrong on that one in the first para. Well actually, I am very glad you are wrong.

[RevidgeBlue]

Sorry Revidge, you are wrong on that one in the first para. Well actually, I am very glad you are wrong.

So you are saying that you've personally read the terms of the trust document?

[Paul]

There are some very good posts in here. I'm not sure if I am for or against outside investment at Ewood. My basic fear, and what I believe will happen in the future, is clubs will collapse as the rich man finds another plaything and moves on. These foreign investors have absolutely no interest in English football, they have no connection whatsoever and see you and me as nothing more than a consumer waiting to be milked.

There are only two reasons for the current outside investment in English football - profit and challenge. The profit motive is obvious and the "challenge" is simple. These men are already enormously successful, they need a challenge, an interest. At best the investment wll last while the owner is alive but more probably only till he finds another plaything.

Can anyone provide any other reason as to why Paul Allen should wish to buy Southampton? I very much doubt it. He has already been quoted as stating "the population, the potential brand and the property ownership" make Southampton very attractive.

Without outside investment Rovers will find it increasingly difficult to compete, with it we face many hidden dangers.

Does anyone on here believe we, or any smaller club for that matter, will be "allowed" to win the Premier League again? This is the reality we are looking at. Those who have already purchased clubs, especially the big four, will perceive the threat to their power, income and profit from investors in the likes of Villa, City etc. How will Utd, Chelsea, etc react - just watch. Buy the best, pay the best eliminate the risk.

I know my views in these areas are not popular but just think about it. You buy a club for £800 million, are you going to let some Johnny come lately threaten your position? Of course not. This money simply ramps up the stakes for transfers and wages.

Sport? Level playing field? Equal opportunity to win? Ha! I'm sure Messrs Abramovic and Glazier have trouble sleeping at night.

[yoda]

Time Magazine's view of the Premiership

From the article

"Despite losing money last season, Sheffield United bought China's Chengdu Five Bull football team (and duly renamed the side the Blades, to match the English club's moniker). Since then, United has opened a city-center bar and retail outlet at the stadium. Analysts are impressed"

what Sheffield have done here is spot on, the Rovers should do something along the same lines, the Chinese football market will be huge in the future and could secure the fortunes for ewood for years to come, the Chinese are lapping up anything European and especially English.

[philipl]

The Sunday Telegraph analyses the motives behind American businessmen buying into English clubs.

The most interesting comment is that they don't "get" promotion and relegation. Although it seems Paul Allen does.

Paul's post above is the most striking of contributions. I have asked myself if deep down, do I think he is right and the answer is a sickeningly unequivocal yes.

At the very best, the "sporting" competition is a business "competition". If it is not even a competition of any sort, we are all lost.

[Fife Rover]

Time Magazine's view of the Premiership

Just read the last two sentences of this article. That really does say it all!! The very reason why fans of long standing (and creatures of habit to boot) are quite literally "pig sick" of the whole nasty business and want nothing more to do with it.

Let the American "sell snow to Esckimo" technique merchants just get on with it and take PL football down the road to hell. We will continue to watch REAL football with the likes of Accy Stanley, Dunfermline, Cowdenbeath, East Fife etc, etc.

[Paul Mellelieu]

Part of the pleaure of supporting the Rovers (and I guess playing for and managing) is the absence of a charlatan being at the head of the club. These are depressing times really for football and one does have to conclude that the prospects of us being squeezed by larger clubs with rich backers is only a matter of when, not if.

[Biscuitbutt81]

You guys should keep up the xenophobia. It's really charming.

Boy, us evil Americans sure are going to run you into the ground. Better watch out!

I mean, look at what's happened with Manchester United. WHAT A DISASTER IT'S BEEN THUS FAR.

[ABBEY]

so you would like rovers to have massive debt and a huge hike in ticket prices would you?

[Paul]

You guys should keep up the xenophobia. It's really charming.

Boy, us evil Americans sure are going to run you into the ground. Better watch out!

I mean, look at what's happened with Manchester United. WHAT A DISASTER IT'S BEEN THUS FAR.

I apologise if I sound anti-American or xenophobic. I'm not, promise.

What I would like answered is this, and an answer from over the pond would be very interesting. Why are extraordinarily successful and wealthy American businessmen suddenly interested in football. What possible attraction outside of profit and challenge can it have to them?

Tongue in cheek, I wait for the guy who comes to buy Plymouth Argyle to repay the Pilgrim Fathers for their efforts.

[American]

After the Richest Clubs list came out, they had an analyst with Price Waterhouse. They asked about the debt of United and he pointed out that it isn't anything to worry about because they are making a good profit and refinanced the debt to more reasonable levels.

So yes, I would like to be in that situation and winning stuff. But Americans know nothing about business. Just look at the Forbes list of richest people....

[Eddie]

I worry about investment simply because of where it may leave clubs several years down the line, it doesn't worry me that the owner himself is foreign; if we were bought by an Englishman who wasn't previously a Rovers supporter I would be equally concerned. American, United aren't winning things because of their foreign investment. They've been winning things for years before they were bought and as of yet we've yet to see any results stemming from the take-over. As for the business aspect, obviously these men are very good businessmen and know how to make money, but that is the worrying part. They will have a drive to make money and value every penny that they ever invest, I don't think many of them will have a different mind-set when investing in the club and, although they will want it to do well, as they won't have a passion for the club itself it will remain in their eyes an investment.

[Fife Rover]

You guys should keep up the xenophobia. It's really charming.

Boy, us evil Americans sure are going to run you into the ground. Better watch out!

I mean, look at what's happened with Manchester United. WHAT A DISASTER IT'S BEEN THUS FAR.

You think you are being facetious in your statement above. I absolutely agree with you! You speak the LITERAL TRUTH.

An UTTER DISASTER, which exactly describes the whole sorry business that is the very idea of PREMIER LEAGUE football.

In this country there are quite literally millions of football fans that have seen and loved football with all it's up's and down's over their lifetime. And the new idea of "Hey heres a product that will make us all very rich" or alternatively "let's soak these stupid B****s for their last £/$" can go to hell for me and many, many more long term football fans that have seen through the scam. Unfortunately the younger fans don't have the memory of better times to fall back on and therefore are far more easily duped.

[American]

It's always been a business. It's just now the revenues are more evenly distributed among the participants (owners and players).

Get into most matches for free as years ago, Fife? They might not be moving in a direction you want, but they are running it as a business. I'd rather Rovers be a successful team with a wide reaching fan base in the Prem than be a local club in division 1 (the old division 3). If anything, I think much more can be done marketing-wise that new owners might spend the money to do. Many of these potential owners have successfully run sports franchises (look up how poor the Bucs were before being bought by the Glazers, for example) and know what they are getting into. They probably also see on the horizon a better system of sharing revenues (in terms of the smaller clubs being sought - obviously some owners are banking on the opposite) or other untapped potential revenue streams (live football on the internet still has great potential).