[Archived] Rovers Takeover Thread

[Paul]

I hate to say this but we appear to be attracting some strange attention from faceless 'consortiums' who many fans believe will not have the best interests of the club at heart.

Faceless consortiums? All these new owners are friggin faceless, who amongst us can genuinely say they had ever heard of the new PL owners before they purchased their respective clubs? As for the supposed "thrill" of owning a PL club it's all a load of absolute ######, what amazes me is just how many people are taken in by the whole thing. Do people not realise outside of Ewood park there isn't a single person who cares what happens to Blackburn Rovers? The owners, the media, the advertisers, the players, Sky, the whole shooting match is about nothing other than exploiting the massive commercial opportunities currently presented by football. Look at it sensibly, just look at it and ask one question - "Is it sustainable?" We are being ripped off on a massive scale and the saddest thing is so many fans fall for it hook, line and sinker. Look at Anfield and Eastlands, fit and proper to run a football club? If it wasn't so sad you'd have to laugh.

Great post Tris.

[Paul Mellelieu]

The truth is Paul that Rovers' fans, with our £250 season tickets, are probably the least ripped off. The rest pf the set up, as you say, is a disgrace.

[nicko]

Come on - who are you trying to kid? That's a truly ridiculous statement.

Liverpool v Man City today, both clubs have "new" owners who may or may not have had plans to make money in the long term - who knows? In the short term the "buzz" of running their respective clubs has involved spending tens of millions of £££ and then "coming up with new ideas" (ie new managers) and therefore alienating 90% of the fanbase!

With the resultant hate mail, vitriolic graffiti, public slagging off in the phone-ins and forums, adverse chanting in the grounds which reaches our living rooms in glorious surround sound, and of course the slating from your colleagues in the sports pages of every newspaper...

You can champion the cause of people like Dan Williams and Chris Ronnie all you like - maybe it sells papers for you in this area now that the People prints an edition so localised that your "scoops" don't even reach Manchester or Liverpool. Which of course explains the now weekly "exclusive taster" which you peddle out on this site every Saturday night in order to shift a few extra local rags the next day.

However as you are slowly finding out, the JW trust is the best possible owner for our club right now, and it's going to take something extraordinary to change that position.

Jokers like Dan Williams don't stand a chance - because they ARE in it to make money, and there is quite simply no money to be made from BRFC.

Your usual tripe.

You don't know the plans of Dan Williams or Chris Ronnie. You only knew their names from here and in the dreadful red-top media. Yet you form opinions and have such deep knowledge.

So get your own information and apply your own expertise.

[Paul]

The truth is Paul that Rovers' fans, with our £250 season tickets, are probably the least ripped off. The rest pf the set up, as you say, is a disgrace.

Yes, 100% agree Rovers, as a club, continue to act in a proper manner. We seem to be the only ones with any decency left.

[Eddie]

Faceless consortiums? All these new owners are friggin faceless, who amongst us can genuinely say they had ever heard of the new PL owners before they purchased their respective clubs? As for the supposed "thrill" of owning a PL club it's all a load of absolute ######, what amazes me is just how many people are taken in by the whole thing. Do people not realise outside of Ewood park there isn't a single person who cares what happens to Blackburn Rovers? The owners, the media, the advertisers, the players, Sky, the whole shooting match is about nothing other than exploiting the massive commercial opportunities currently presented by football. Look at it sensibly, just look at it and ask one question - "Is it sustainable?" We are being ripped off on a massive scale and the saddest thing is so many fans fall for it hook, line and sinker. Look at Anfield and Eastlands, fit and proper to run a football club? If it wasn't so sad you'd have to laugh.

Great post Tris.

You're right, but what we also have to look at is that so far (I know it hasn't been going on for that long) the results of others clubs being bought have been largely positive.

On top of that there are examples from other sports and countries of owners buying clubs with whom they had no previous ties to and running them very well.

To say that we sell to the first person who stumps up the cash is stupid, but at the same time to say that we can't improve on the current situation and that there isn't a good owner out there to be found is equally stupid in my opinion. The club is totally correct to be looking for a buyer and we'll go through a lot of duds before we find a stud, but at the same time I think fans need to be a little bit more understanding of the process and also take a much harder look at the long-term future of the club.

[Paul]

You're right, but what we also have to look at is that so far (I know it hasn't been going on for that long) the results of others clubs being bought have been largely positive.

In my working life I've raised three rounds of venture capital and helped with the sale of a business out of venture capital to a major public company. Those were largely positive, for as long as the P&L was largely positive.

We can only judge this outside investment in English football as "largely positive" when we see the real outcome. Personally I think the farce we see at Liverpool and City will prove more typical than the apparently very positive happenings at Villa.

[tony gale's mic]

Is it that hard to imagine that a benefactor-type figure might come along?

If you had hundreds of millions of pounds and wanted to have some fun then running a Premier League club could well be a big area of interest, even if you did lose money out of it surely the experience would be money well spent? Especially if you managed to guide the club to a degree of success, you'd have the adulation of hunderds of thousands and the respect of many more.

With the Premier League huge all over the world and Rovers consistently proving ourselves to be a top 6-top 10 club is it that much of a stretch to think someone, somewhere will see us and fancy spending some money and taking up the challenge?

[Iceman]

without proper investment,we are going to suffer in the near future.Every season,these millionaire and billionaire oweners are pumping more and more money into their clubs,attracting better and better players.If we are not careful,we might fall so far behind that by the time we react,it will be too late.I agree though,that unless the right guy,or consortium steps in,we should continue with our current way of running the club.Its stable,and its working.

[philipl]

Is it that hard to imagine that a benefactor-type figure might come along?

If you had hundreds of millions of pounds and wanted to have some fun then running a Premier League club could well be a big area of interest, even if you did lose money out of it surely the experience would be money well spent? Especially if you managed to guide the club to a degree of success, you'd have the adulation of hunderds of thousands and the respect of many more.

With the Premier League huge all over the world and Rovers consistently proving ourselves to be a top 6-top 10 club is it that much of a stretch to think someone, somewhere will see us and fancy spending some money and taking up the challenge?

I agree tgm, but it would seem nobody with the requisite depth of pocket to spend on Rovers has shown up. And neither Dan Williams nor Chris Ronnie would appear to be in the benefactor category either unless I seriously misread their intentions and means.

In the list of recently acquired Premier League Football Clubs, I would divide them into the following categories:

Good thing:

Abramovich/Chelsea

Lerner/Villa

Quinn/Sunderland

Gaydarmuk/Pompey

Jury out:

Glazer/Man U (winning times still rolling but ouch in the pocket for fans and still big ???? over managing that debt, never mind getting rid of it; still buying players on the never-never)

Ashley/Newcastle (bye Fat Freddie is a very good thing but the KK appointment farce could take the club anywhere)

Icelanders/ West Ham (Tevezgate, Curbishley appointed. loadsamoney to get rid of that over-paid one-trick pony Australian fullback)

Bad thing:

Hicks/Gillett /Liverpool

A bunch of clubs in the football league now

[PAFELL]

without proper investment,we are going to suffer in the near future.Every season,these millionaire and billionaire oweners are pumping more and more money into their clubs,attracting better and better players.If we are not careful,we might fall so far behind that by the time we react,it will be too late.I agree though,that unless the right guy,or consortium steps in,we should continue with our current way of running the club.Its stable,and its working.

Don't you think that even these so called big clubs will exceed their limit of cash in flow, possible implode. What happens when these owners of clubs die and the ones who are beneficaries of their wills are not interested in football.

Could not the chelsea owners say that he has had enough if Chelsea win the Champions league in Moscow - maybe this was his starting ambition. At anythime these owners could say to their clubs 'I am not putting in anymore money into the club - you are on your own'. Then what would happen? At least Rovers have been prudent in their dealings.

[Fife Rover]

Don't you think that even these so called big clubs will exceed their limit of cash in flow, possible implode. What happens when these owners of clubs die and the ones who are beneficaries of their wills are not interested in football.

Could not the chelsea owners say that he has had enough if Chelsea win the Champions league in Moscow - maybe this was his starting ambition. At anythime these owners could say to their clubs 'I am not putting in anymore money into the club - you are on your own'. Then what would happen? At least Rovers have been prudent in their dealings.

Rovers are probably the only club in the P.L. that has been bought out by a true benefactor, and are certainly still one of the best-run clubs from a wise and prudent point of view; maybe the only one. The club and it's owners should not be in any great hurry to alter that state of affairs. The trustees seem to have that all under control, and also we as supporters should not be in too much of a hurry to see that state changed. Utmost caution is required, and to be fair so far it seems to be being applied.

[Iceman]

Don't you think that even these so called big clubs will exceed their limit of cash in flow, possible implode. What happens when these owners of clubs die and the ones who are beneficaries of their wills are not interested in football.

Could not the chelsea owners say that he has had enough if Chelsea win the Champions league in Moscow - maybe this was his starting ambition. At anythime these owners could say to their clubs 'I am not putting in anymore money into the club - you are on your own'. Then what would happen? At least Rovers have been prudent in their dealings.

i agree with you whole heartedly PAF,i was just merely making a point,as to the fact that times are changing.We use to be money bags blackburn and everybody else seemed to have been lagging behind.Certainly,i wouldnt trade the current way the club is being run,with an invester who will pack up after a brief spell.

[doctorryan]

Faceless consortiums? All these new owners are friggin faceless, who amongst us can genuinely say they had ever heard of the new PL owners before they purchased their respective clubs? As for the supposed "thrill" of owning a PL club it's all a load of absolute ######, what amazes me is just how many people are taken in by the whole thing.

Some of us knew who these people were Paul, especially the USA idiots. These NFL-NHL-NBA-MLB owners travel in the same social circles and there's definitely a bit of "keeping up with the Jones" going on here: "You only own a National Football League club? Tsk. Tsk. I have both a National Football League club and an FA Premier League club as well!!

Unfortunately; ego-driven pubescent volatility and financial success are not mutually exclusive of each other, as professional sports owners here in the US exemplify all the time.

[Eddie]

Rovers are probably the only club in the P.L. that has been bought out by a true benefactor, and are certainly still one of the best-run clubs from a wise and prudent point of view; maybe the only one. The club and it's owners should not be in any great hurry to alter that state of affairs. The trustees seem to have that all under control, and also we as supporters should not be in too much of a hurry to see that state changed. Utmost caution is required, and to be fair so far it seems to be being applied.

I think Boro can safely claim to be in that club, they've just done it with less success. Reading also seem to be in a similar situation, although he probably doesn't invest quite as much as he should.

[Eddie]

Don't you think that even these so called big clubs will exceed their limit of cash in flow, possible implode. What happens when these owners of clubs die and the ones who are beneficaries of their wills are not interested in football.

Could not the chelsea owners say that he has had enough if Chelsea win the Champions league in Moscow - maybe this was his starting ambition. At anythime these owners could say to their clubs 'I am not putting in anymore money into the club - you are on your own'. Then what would happen? At least Rovers have been prudent in their dealings.

We're pretty much living through that right now.

New investment doesn't mean we need to have a blank cheque and live well beyond our means. It's possible that we could simply spend more in the summer without increasing our wage bill all that much, meaning that if the new owner jumped ship we would be in a pretty similar situation to the one we are in now.

[Plastic Head]

If Mr Keegan doesn't think Newcastle have a hope of breaking into the top 4 with a meagre transfer budget of £40M+ in 2 years what chance have we got???

However people do have a very short term view of football and think the status quo will never change.

But remember 10-15 years ago Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool were Premier League also-rans.

And so were Man U before 1992-3.

As things stand, every season we are still in the Prem is a poke in the eye to Sky and the rest of the media and an embarrassment to the likes of Newcastle, Spurs, Villa etc.

However, Kev was right on one point, if money and top players keep getting drawn to 4 teams it won't be long before they are playing Harlem Globetrotters type exhibitions at Home and people will eventually get fed up of paying £1000 for a season ticket to see that.

[laughatthedingles]

However, Kev was right on one point, if money and top players keep getting drawn to 4 teams it won't be long before they are playing Harlem Globetrotters type exhibitions at Home and people will eventually get fed up of paying £1000 for a season ticket to see that.

That's called Scotland, have they got bored yet?

[Plastic Head]

That's called Scotland, have they got bored yet?

Agreed, but they are other "reasons" why people decide to follow the Auld Firm.

[joey_big_nose]

But remember 10-15 years ago Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool were Premier League also-rans.

And so were Man U before 1992-3.

Diffeence now is the Champions League. Used to be only one team in the European Cup. Also it would generate little revenue. Now it is worth £40m to clubs that reach the later stages. It also offers a platform which every player wants to play on. Now it is basically impossible for a club in the "other 16" to attract a player who is wanted by the "big four" even if it is only to sit on the bench. Clubs with the supporter base and financial resources to theoretically retain their best players - like Spurs or Villa who are likely to lose Berbatov and Barry) now cannot. Those two are likely to turn up at Old Trafford and Anfield and only play 50-60% of games.

It is a shoddy mess. But the Champions League is entrenched now. It's slowly going to hollow out the domestic leagues round Europe to a few successful teams. Spain has shown quite a lot of variation in who has qualified for the CL but I expect that to decline over time. Lyon's subjugation of the French league has an awful lot to do with consistently offering CL football.

It is a cancer. The likely outcome is of Scottish football. The top four will recieve ever more massive support as they dominate the TV schedules (particularly in the ever popular CL) and are the only clubs that can offer reall top flight success whilst other clubs, even former giants, lose fans dramatically.

In a stint of perversity the only way to increase competition is to increase the access to the CL. But that is only heading one way - a European Super League...

[b12_simon]

That's called Scotland, have they got bored yet?

I'm with PH on this one - our league's becoming as predictable as the SweatyPL.

[Hughesy]

I disagree - with all the different investors knocking around and the likes of Arsenal losing key players, and liverpool not being the greatest anymore - i can see 1 or 2 clubs eventually breaking in among those 2. However I cant see many challenging Chelsea or Man U.

[PAFELL]

Diffeence now is the Champions League. Used to be only one team in the European Cup. Also it would generate little revenue. Now it is worth £40m to clubs that reach the later stages. It also offers a platform which every player wants to play on. Now it is basically impossible for a club in the "other 16" to attract a player who is wanted by the "big four" even if it is only to sit on the bench. Clubs with the supporter base and financial resources to theoretically retain their best players - like Spurs or Villa who are likely to lose Berbatov and Barry) now cannot. Those two are likely to turn up at Old Trafford and Anfield and only play 50-60% of games.

It is a shoddy mess. But the Champions League is entrenched now. It's slowly going to hollow out the domestic leagues round Europe to a few successful teams. Spain has shown quite a lot of variation in who has qualified for the CL but I expect that to decline over time. Lyon's subjugation of the French league has an awful lot to do with consistently offering CL football.

It is a cancer. The likely outcome is of Scottish football. The top four will recieve ever more massive support as they dominate the TV schedules (particularly in the ever popular CL) and are the only clubs that can offer reall top flight success whilst other clubs, even former giants, lose fans dramatically.

In a stint of perversity the only way to increase competition is to increase the access to the CL. But that is only heading one way - a European Super League...

a European Super League... that is the next step - which I believe is a certain next step. How they would do it is another thing. Would the top team of each european league join it - (not certian how many leagues there are) with the same being relegated each season. The main block to this would be each league would not want it as it would effect there own leagues money wise. But money always finds away around even that!!!!!!!!!

[philipl]

Disbandonment of the G14 and replacement by the 100-member UEFA Clubs' Committee has probably delayed the Super League but will make it more certain to happen when it appears from within the UEFA aegis.

Points to watch for are whether the Premier League's reformed 39th game idea ever gets UEFA and FIFA approval (setting the precedence for trans-border league games) and how much greater the financial dominance of the EPL becomes.

I know I have been pooh-poohed for saying this but England's Big 4 are on their way to becoming Europe's Big 4 judging by the last 4 Champions League competitions including the current one. Another of couple of seasons in which the Big 4 only get knocked out by each other in Europe will start all kinds of counter-currents running.

[1864roverite]

Keegan may have been misquoted a little on this subject.

what he actually said was that in 3 years that he has he cannot see him breaking into the top 4 with his budget, personally, if he spent 100m he couldnt get Newcastle into the top 4 either.

The difference with clubs like newcastle is that on the pitch they come across as high and mighty yet behind the scenes they are nothing short of amateurish. Rovers have the behind the scenes management whilst on the field things are progressing very very well indeed. ANY added investment will make Rovers top 6 guaranteed and maybe challenge for the 4th spot. After all, we have shown we can give any of the top a game both home and away.

[John]

Interesting to read Harry's verdict on Keegan's comments (see the link below). One point he picks up upon which I have been mulling over, is that you have all these clubs who are going to spend lots of money, but only so many teams can win the title, get into Europe etc - there are going to be some unhappy chairman.

Harry Redknapp believes it will take £150million for any Premier League side to shatter the big four's dominance of the division.