[Archived] Rovers Sold ??

[BlueMonday]

"...Ipswich chief executive Derek Bowden believes that the £44million takeover of the Coca-Cola Championship club by businessman Marcus Evans is "absolutely essential" to win promotion back to the Premier League..."

Apologies if this is being discussed on another threas, but I just came across the above quote was lifted from the Daily Mail of yesterday (not my usual choice of newspaper!). Valued virtually the same as our very own. Ipswich Town; Am I missing something?

Thats good then! Makes Rovers look very good value for money

[allanncd]

The conclusion I've reached - and I have some involvement in corporate finance deals - is that the asking price is putting off potential investors. These investors are finding better deals in the Championship where the entire share capital of a technically insolvent club can be bought for £1 and the new owner does a deal with the major creditors for them to take a haircut on their debt. There is no other explanation for anyone taking over Ipswich with £40m debt. If the Walker trustees want to get rid of their ongoing financial burden of financing Rovers they must lower the price. They would be well advised to do it now because as we all know in foptball things can fall apart quickly and utterly as the boards at Charlton and Southampton to name but two will be all too painfully aware.

[philipl]

No doubt the Trustees are noticing that an investor has just paid two times turnover to acquire an 80% interest in Ipswich Town. On the same basis the Rovers selling price would be in the £200m region as unlike Ipswich, Rovers are in the promised land already and the risk of the dingles (or any three of 22 other clubs) taking your promotion slot doesn't exist...

But that is a light aside.

The reality is the Trustees are not sticking on any asking price as far as I am aware. The terms of the Walker legacy which probably effectively require any purchaser to show available funds now to commit north of £100m to financing the club into the future would seem to be the problem.

[Mike Graham]

"...Ipswich chief executive Derek Bowden believes that the £44million takeover of the Coca-Cola Championship club by businessman Marcus Evans is "absolutely essential" to win promotion back to the Premier League..."

Apologies if this is being discussed on another threas, but I just came across the above quote was lifted from the Daily Mail of yesterday (not my usual choice of newspaper!). Valued virtually the same as our very own. Ipswich Town; Am I missing something?

what part of Tel aviv are you from the cbk?

I was out there last week and then spent a few days in Eliat.

[rovers1993]

nicko seeming as the january transfer window is soon coming and i remembered that Dan Williams said the take-over was still on but he is not rushing to seal until the january transfer window.

you have any update on if williams is still trying to take-over or if there is going to be a take-over before or during the transfer window?

[Paul]

Rovers home results against teams that have received significant outside investment:

City 1 - 0 (fourth game of the season)

Pompey 0 - 1

Villa 0 - 4

WHU 0 - 1

It pains me deeply to say this, and I remain strongly opposed to the principle of foreign investors in English football clubs, but with one goal scored, six conceded, and three defeats from four it is very difficult to put up an arguement against the need for outside investment at Ewood.

To progress we need to beat these clubs at home. OK we beat Portsmouth away but my memory is they were very effective at Ewood in the PL. The Villa score line didn't do the game justice but they took their chances. WHU didn't do a great deal yesterday but they stopped us in every department. On the basis of these results we can't make progress because these teams have improved considerably and Rovers do not have the resources to compete with them.

[philipl]

If ESPN are still interested in bidding against Sky and Setanta for Premiership TV rights two/three years from now, the twist in the fortunes of Premiership clubs will take yet another improbable lurch upwards.

Being cynical, there are three rather over-extended American owners at OT and Anfield for whom the timing of this announcement could literally be mana from heaven.

However, it could re-ignite interest generally in buying EPL clubs. Since the summer's activity, its been all talk no deals everywhere.

[thecomebackid]

what part of Tel aviv are you from the cbk?

I was out there last week and then spent a few days in Eliat.

I now live in the drab TLV satellite town of Rishon-Le-Zion, having formerly lived just off Rothschild Street (apologies if my phonetics are incorrect).

For bevvies, tottie & general R&R; Tel Aviv takes some beating Preston Blue, eh?

[thecomebackid]

No doubt the Trustees are noticing that an investor has just paid two times turnover to acquire an 80% interest in Ipswich Town. On the same basis the Rovers selling price would be in the £200m region as unlike Ipswich, Rovers are in the promised land already and the risk of the dingles (or any three of 22 other clubs) taking your promotion slot doesn't exist...

But that is a light aside.

The reality is the Trustees are not sticking on any asking price as far as I am aware. The terms of the Walker legacy which probably effectively require any purchaser to show available funds now to commit north of £100m to financing the club into the future would seem to be the problem.

Within the remit of the terms of the trust; could an argument be justified Philip for the Board to increase outlay on players:

1. To improve the league position of the team thus increasing revenues for the Club through TV money & potential Champions League qualification?

2. To raise the profile & marketability of the Club, thus enhancing its value regarding a possible sale?

[Hughesy]

What happened to that fella from America? Has he now given up on us?

[rovers_rob]

What happened to that fella from America? Has he now given up on us?

Well he did say his plan was to get soething done by January :

"We are definitely still interested," said the young entrepreneur, who was at Ewood recently to see Rovers beat Manchester City.

"We are still working behind the scenes to put everything together, and when we have done that, we will get back in touch with the club again.

"My personal plan is to try and get something done before January.

"At the moment, there's not a mad scramble to try and get something done because the transfer window has just closed, and because of that, people are assuming the deal is dead.

"But that's not the case at all."

But it seems as though he hasn't got the money to take us forward :

"We're not in that situation at the moment. But there's no point in selling the club just to stand still.

"The motivation of the trustees is they won't sell to someone who'll just come in and nothing will change, because there's no reason to.

"If a buyer comes in that can move the club forward then I'm sure they'll sell. But that hasn't happened as of yet so we'll keep going."

Lets hope sparky can work his magic in the transfer market again because it looks like the current board won't back him with any serious funds and it doesn't look like anyone can afford to buy the club and take us forward.

[Dunnfc]

On the offical boards it says that DW is taking over an american team so they can be assoicated with us once DW takes over.

That true or bs?

[brian_gallagher85]

About as BS as the fact he'll be taking us over any time soon I'd imagine

[philipl]

No doubt someone who understands the workings of football journalism better than me will explain why the Telegraph really have it in for Liverpool/Gillet/Hicks. Their stadium financing and by extension the whole business plan is in trouble.

I had anticipated that Carson Yeung would complete his Birmingham City take over but it appears nobody in HK and China is willing to buy into the idea that BIG CLUB should cost £64m just to pay off the porn boys BEFORE operating losses, stadium financing etc etc

Looks like the credit crunch has seen the high water mark of "investors" willing to "invest" in EPL clubs as opposed to old owners willing to divest for unlikely profits. The EPL route to making a return on capital for new owners always looked iffy to say the least and now there aren't banking funds running around looking for projects to get sunk into, the opportunity to become a football mogul leveraged using other people's money is not what it was six months ago.

Investment is subject to fads like anything else and the EPL's track record would suggest football clubs are becoming yesterday's fashion. There are five places in the world where the cash/owners are likely to come from:

Doors shut-

USA- Glazers have failed to roll over/refinance their highest premium loans even in the good times. They will be regretting turning down the terms offered twelve months ago as Hedge Fund United edges closer. Hicks and Gillet's woes of being bullied by Rafa and buying an existing financial model which doesn't work will have been noticed. So that's two of the BIG FOUR in US hands and both in trouble. Only Randy Lerner seems to be quietly getting on with his business at Villa but he paid Deadly Doug less than the porn boys want for the decidedly B team at St Andrew's. On this track record there will be few Americans left standing in line to move into the EPL other than bottom fishers looking for assets to strip.

Middle East- Dubai didn't like what happened at Liverpool and might yet step in when Gillet and Hicks decide to cut their losses. But an EPL club is no longer on the list of must-have accessories amongst the Princes and Sheikhs not least because they would rub-up against the anti-Islamic under culture of popular sentiment.

Far East- apart from a deposed PM/ telephone salesman at City, nobody from these football mad parts has turned up and done a deal. They would be around for distress sales but apart from the severely over-borrowed, nobody in the EPL is or should be in the "distressed" category following the 30% jump in turnovers this year.

Doors sort of still open-

UK and Ireland- Mike Ashley is a one-off in being a fan, having the readies and Newcastle available to buy. The other club with no need to finance its own seriously big brand new stadium is Sunderland which is in Irish hands who are digging deeper than planned simply to have to buy EPL survival. There are still fans out there who made it big but the amounts now needed (Chesh suggesting £500m worth before considering the game) means big has to be BIG and there are not many of those.

Russia- Abramovich is on paper still ahead at Chelsea (seriously-underlying asset values) and still able to have fun whilst the Gaydamuks are enjoying success unprecedented at Pompey since the 1940s. On the basis that they see two of their number achieving pretty well most of their objectives through EPL ownership, oligarchs would be and are interested. BUT they have either made their peace with Putin or been squeezed so the need for high profile survivability is not what it was, doing anything in Britain is unpatriotic for Russians in the current climate and the Uzbek at Arsenal is rightly getting a very tough ride.

But of course there is no nicko to comment.

[bubblerrovers]

MODS can the title of this thread be changed too Rovers NOT sold, Maybe i could start some other threads like rovers in champions league or rovers sign henry

[thenodrog]

From Philip's Daily Telegraph sourced article......

"However, the Daily Telegraph has learned that plans to raise the longer term funding required to complete the relocation from Anfield has been shelved until 2009 at the earliest.

The global credit crunch and nervousness over debt on Liverpool's balance sheet has forced Hicks and Gillett to abandon plans to raise all the money they need in one go. Instead, they are now looking to borrow £350m to pay off a two-year loan with RBS worth around £270m, inject £60m of working capital for the ground and cover £25m of credit notes used to finance the summer purchases of Fernando Torres and Ryan Babel, again provided by RBS. It is understood that while the £60m of stadium financing will get Hicks and Gillett through the first 18 months of work on the Stanley Park project there are serious concerns over how they will raise the remaining £300m needed to complete the stadium."

So just who thinks the final stadium bill will still be £360m in 3 years time?

This might well end up sh1t or bust for the mickey mousers. Oh well never mind.

[Sandiway Blue]

From Philip's Daily Telegraph sourced article......

"However, the Daily Telegraph has learned that plans to raise the longer term funding required to complete the relocation from Anfield has been shelved until 2009 at the earliest.

The global credit crunch and nervousness over debt on Liverpool's balance sheet has forced Hicks and Gillett to abandon plans to raise all the money they need in one go. Instead, they are now looking to borrow £350m to pay off a two-year loan with RBS worth around £270m, inject £60m of working capital for the ground and cover £25m of credit notes used to finance the summer purchases of Fernando Torres and Ryan Babel, again provided by RBS. It is understood that while the £60m of stadium financing will get Hicks and Gillett through the first 18 months of work on the Stanley Park project there are serious concerns over how they will raise the remaining £300m needed to complete the stadium."

So just who thinks the final stadium bill will still be £360m in 3 years time?

This might well end up sh1t or bust for the mickey mousers. Oh well never mind.

C`est la vie

[AndyC]

Puts it into context when Man United are about to unveil profits ....yes - profits...of £75,000,000

Over £200,000,000 Turnover

[Sandiway Blue]

Puts it into context when Man United are about to unveil profits ....yes - profits...of £75,000,000

Over £200,000,000 Turnover

Only another 9 years left to clear their debts then

[philipl]

I think the unofficial Mancs calculated they needed £101m to meet their interest and debt obligations last year.

Interest is currently running at £60m+ per year so I would imagine the £75m is earnings before interest and tax (EBIT). If it is before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA)- ignoring transfer fees as well as interest, they are in the sticky stuff.

[rebelmswar]

I think the unofficial Mancs calculated they needed £101m to meet their interest and debt obligations last year.

So Manure could fold like a deckchair?

[philipl]

Man U will not fold but the terms of £210m of the £650m debt will give that Hedge Fund the right to start appointing directors soon. Unless the Glazers can successfully restructure their debt the Hedge Fund terms (as filed when Man U was a public company and obliged to disclose) eventually transfer full operational control and ownership away from the Glazers.

I think those are the tranches carrying all the 12% and 18% interest rates which says all you need to know about how enormously geared the Glazer acquisition was.

The Glazers must be sweating not just on having to reschedule £26m of what they should have paid (assuming the profit figure equals cash which could well not be the case) but how they are going to remove that Hedge Fund.

[John]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before: Rochester Rovers?

[1864roverite]

Interesting to note the figures given today on Arsenals home match income.

They generate 3.5 million per home game in match ticket income an then add to that the income from programme sales and Bar/food outlets PLUS retail income and it is a mighty increase on their last year at Highbury where match income was put at just over 1m per home game.

Thats some serious wonga going Wengas way !!

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

....and a season ticket waiting list of some 45,000!