[Archived] Rovers Takeover Thread

[b12_simon]

It's pretty widely accepted that we need to find a buyer to keep where we are and it should be widely accepted that the next owner will be a step down from Jack. We sing "there's only one Jack Walker" and it's true in more ways than one. The fact is that supporters with Jack's fortune and committment are rare as rocking horse.

The next owner will buy us for business/profit reasons, not for love. I can't think of any of the other 91 clubs that have an owner like Jack and I don't expect we'll have another like Jack in my lifetime.

Jack was a true one-off and we should judge the next owner by normal standards, not Jack's

[broadsword]

True o0ne-off, eh?

There's a billionaire about to invest in Norwich.

For crying out loud, NORWICH!

Surely there must be someone out there with a few bob?

[b12_simon]

  Bryan said:

True o0ne-off, eh?

There's a billionaire about to invest in Norwich.

For crying out loud, NORWICH!

Surely there must be someone out there with a few bob?

OK that's us and Norwich. And the other 90?

[American]

  Fife Rover said:

I know I am being naive/thick/ stupid on this subject, but all I do know is that IF I had been in Jack's happy position of having huge amounts of dosh to buy my beloved Rovers, I would gladly have done it, and I too would have made provision for a trust to run Rovers after my death. But with a big difference to what seems to be the case now with Jack's provisions.

I have already as things stand right now agreed with my two remaining children and their spouse's that they will not be benefitting in any way (except for the contents of my present house) as I have taken an equity release deal on my house and it is fairly likely that if I or my wife live for a few years there will be little or nothing left in the value of the house to leave to them. They are absolutely in agreement with this as they are both in a decent positon financially and have made their provision for their retirement. They also believe as I do that nobody should expect to inherit anything from parent's or anyone else. It is up to each and every one of us to provide for our own future needs and that is what I have always taught them to believe as well. So the point I am getting to is that my will does not provide for anything for the children or grandchildren, and therefore what I have is mine and my wife's to do as we please with.

Good man, Fife. I've always said that if I left money I would put it in an education fund. That is the only thing we need to provide to our children once they have become adults.

[broadsword]

  b12_simon said:

OK that's us and Norwich. And the other 90?

Oh stop making sense would you, I wanted to have a moan!

PS: I think the Chuckle Brothers are involved at Rotherham?

[modes98]

  Bryan said:

PS: I think the Chuckle Brothers are involved at Rotherham?

Aren't they at Birmingham?

Oh no that's the Golds, i always get those 2 confused.

[b12_simon]

  modes98 said:

Aren't they at Birmingham?

Oh no that's the Golds, i always get those 2 confused.

The Knuckle-Shuffle Brothers. An easy mistake to make.

[Roversider]

  nicko said:

He's called Eddie Davies.

Owns the club, lives on the Isle of Man and has put money in for signings.

He did that to protect it from being relegated.

The benefit of having an owner who still goes to games...

Thanks Nicko for reminding people that Davies still bankrolls Wanderers. I'm always amazed at how low a profile he keeps.

Jack still attends in spirit if not in body and the Trust keep his involvement, however tenuously, alive.

As an aside Nicko do you think any of the potential buyers are put off by the thought of adverse reactions from the fans? Personally I would have thought Mr. Chowdery would be a good option given his location and connections with Brad. Also I'm surprised at how people see him as 'under-funded', granted we don't know how commited he would be to put large sums in but he would still be more active than the Trust. Maybe they don't really want to sell ....

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

I hate to say this but I wonder how long the ticket price reduction initiative would last if any business man/entrepreneur were to take over the club?.....I fear that would be one of the first major changes for the worse.

[John]

I think JW sums up the problem well.....we may be waiting a long time....

"The problem is the next level for us is regularly finishing in the top six, and ultimately the top four, so we are looking for the next Roman Abramovich, which is a very difficult task."

[Neil Weaver]

  Bryan said:

Oh stop making sense would you, I wanted to have a moan!

PS: I think the Chuckle Brothers are involved at Rotherham?

And there are some things that even the mighty Chuckle Bros can't help with. There's a message in these things somewhere.

[BlueMonday]

  Neil Weaver said:

And there are some things that even the mighty Chuckle Bros can't help with. There's a message in these things somewhere.

,

Ah, but we have Jim 'lovley, great smashin' Bowen. wouldn't swap him.

[yoda]

  Roversider said:

Thanks Nicko for reminding people that Davies still bankrolls Wanderers. I'm always amazed at how low a profile he keeps.

Jack still attends in spirit if not in body and the Trust keep his involvement, however tenuously, alive.

As an aside Nicko do you think any of the potential buyers are put off by the thought of adverse reactions from the fans? Personally I would have thought Mr. Chowdery would be a good option given his location and connections with Brad. Also I'm surprised at how people see him as 'under-funded', granted we don't know how commited he would be to put large sums in but he would still be more active than the Trust. Maybe they don't really want to sell ....

Nabeel Chowdery is not only connected with Blackburn because of Brad, Nabeel's father built up the business while he lived in Blackburn, he passed away some years ago. The family own lots of town centre properties in Blackburn(they used to own the cinema and what was Tiggi's below) the family moved from Blackburn to Cheshire years ago.

[jannerman]

  Neil Weaver said:

And there are some things that even the mighty Chuckle Bros can't help with. There's a message in these things somewhere.

They are actually brothers then...?

Learn something new every day....

[LeChuck]

Here's a link to a mini-profile on the Times website: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle3789868.ece

Unless he's willing to part with more than half of his wealth, it looks really unlikely to he has he sort of money that will make any difference to us.

[Brfcrule1]

Hi all,

Nicko would like the answer to a few questions first off when it was reported originally in the LET Dan Williams wanted a 67M takeover that figure includes all the debts and things. Have the trustees possibly seen that and arrived at the figure that is what the club is worth? hence why parties are not interested?. It was said earlier that N.Choudery was quoted a higher figure than C.Ronnie. Was it due to the fact Ronnie has more wealth & could take the club forward better than what Choudery could?. Could it also be viewed that Choudery at some point in the future could go back to them if financial assistance was needed?. Seems to me the trustees are being greedy and sly quoting 2 different people different prices there should be a fixed standard price whoever takes over! seems as tho they want to start an auction. Nicko any idea who this icelandic consortium are who are interested in rovers? Also the trust says they are doing everything in the best interests of "rovers"the fact they do not want to invest in rovers and as time goes buy the club seems less attractive to buyers heaven forbid we go down will they bail us out if we get in real trouble?. Seems as tho the trust are not carrying out Jack's wishes and need to step aside before things get even worse btw Nicko has ronnie decided to make an official bid for the club? he has had those figures for a while now as always Nicko your input and feedback to us is always highly appreciated.

Laters all.

[nicko]

  Brfcrule1 said:

Hi all,

Nicko would like the answer to a few questions first off when it was reported originally in the LET Dan Williams wanted a 67M takeover that figure includes all the debts and things. Have the trustees possibly seen that and arrived at the figure that is what the club is worth? hence why parties are not interested?. It was said earlier that N.Choudery was quoted a higher figure than C.Ronnie. Was it due to the fact Ronnie has more wealth & could take the club forward better than what Choudery could?. Could it also be viewed that Choudery at some point in the future could go back to them if financial assistance was needed?. Seems to me the trustees are being greedy and sly quoting 2 different people different prices there should be a fixed standard price whoever takes over! seems as tho they want to start an auction. Nicko any idea who this icelandic consortium are who are interested in rovers? Also the trust says they are doing everything in the best interests of "rovers"the fact they do not want to invest in rovers and as time goes buy the club seems less attractive to buyers heaven forbid we go down will they bail us out if we get in real trouble?. Seems as tho the trust are not carrying out Jack's wishes and need to step aside before things get even worse btw Nicko has ronnie decided to make an official bid for the club? he has had those figures for a while now as always Nicko your input and feedback to us is always highly appreciated.

Laters all.

Chowdery has offered a certain figure and is willing to take on the debts.

Ronnie has yet to make anything approaching an offer but values it at less, maybe even much less. He may make a bid, but seems to be playing ti cool and slow.

Williams's figures were probably way too high. The trouble is [a] he did not follow it through and the Trustees are dreaming they can still get something close to that figure.

PS. Reported in the LET?...that was a wind-up wasn't it?

[RevidgeBlue]

So reading betwen the lines nicko, it seems Chowdery has offered in the region of 30-35m and the Trustees want 40-45m?

[nicko]

  RevidgeBlue said:

So reading betwen the lines nicko, it seems Chowdery has offered in the region of 30-35m and the Trustees want 40-45m?

You're good at reading...

[modes98]

Trustees obviously don't want out that much then or they would cut their losses and walk away, assuming all Jack's criteria have been met.

[nicko]

  modes98 said:

Trustees obviously don't want out that much then or they would cut their losses and walk away, assuming all Jack's criteria have been met.

The Trustees want out...but they also want out with a big wad of cash.

THAT is the issue here.

Jack's wishes? I wonder.

Obviously the Trust was left for family and benefactors and they are entitled to their 'inheritance.'

However that's just not going to be too easy in the current climate.

[modes98]

  nicko said:

The Trustees want out...but they also want out with a big wad of cash.

I can understand their desire to make money but Blackburn Rovers FC will not make a new investor money, without big investment, so why are they bothered about a few million pounds which is largely irrelevant to them, they have enough cash for a lifetime.

They should follow Jack's lead and put the club first. Make sure the terms are right for us and accept the deal. I personally do not think that anyone with more money will come in for us and IMO a consortium is not the best way forward.

I guess we're in for years of offers being rejected and the trust not giving the large extra backing required to potentially make the club more profitable.

[robborover]

  nicko said:

The Trustees want out...but they also want out with a big wad of cash.

Alternatively, with Wham, Spuds, Citeh, Everton, Pompey etc... all normally out-spending us. We could have a bad season, get relegated and then they wouldn't get that much anyway. Though, I think we'll survive this season as there are a good 8 teams a lot worse than us. But there is a fine line between success and failure in the PL and this uncertainty could undermine us.

[Gav]

I can’t help but think if this was any other club/supporters more direct action would have been taken to get rid of the trustees. Obviously the situation would have to be clarified, but if the trustees are just after a big pay off its about time they’re made to feel a little less comfortable than they’re feeling right now.

Anyone recall the Brighton fans coming up here to protest against the chap who owned Focus.

Credit where credits due.

[Eddie]

Yep. As I said about a month ago Gav, if they didn't have the Jack Walker legacy to fall back on the torches and pitch forks would have been out by now. It's time that we forget that they have anything to do with Walker and judge them for what they are: horrible football club owners who seem to have no interest in acting in the best interest of the club. They need to go and fast.