[Archived] Rovers Takeover Thread

[stuwilky]

Eddie, Can you name me a League One club that has had £50m+ invested in the last 8 years.

Ta

[Iceman]

Eddie, Can you name me a League One club that has had £50m+ invested in the last 8 years.

Ta

i think QPR from the championship will maybe get to that in the next few years,but i dont know of a league one club..Does Leeds United count?have they spent or have been invested 50 Mill in the last 8 years?

[Manchester Blue]

Wooosh!

Read it again.

I've no idea what you are talking about. I understand the point Eddie is trying to make however you can't say this or that then make a point. Viewed in isolation then the trustees activities may seem poor for a Premiership club. However they would never have been involved in the club if it wasn't for Jack Walker so how can you view them in isolation.

[ABBEY]

eddie eddie dear eddie,your like a spolit prince or rich boy who is upset because daddy took his credit card off him.I would of loved it keeganesqe i know,but i would have loved this board to have been around in bill foxes day when tea bags were squeezed to save money and we had gates of 5 thousand and our heroes were of the calibre of chris thompson ,sean curry and simon garner.I would have loved your reaction to the signings of steve archibald and ossie or the rumours we were trying to sign linekar......eddie what happens happens ,im not harping about the good old days im trying to say eddie live in the real world....we have been spoilt since jack walker splashed the cash.you asked as manc blue said monty python style wher e we would be without the walker money ....LOOK AT BRADFORD,BARNSLEY OR LEEDS

[PAFELL]

eddie eddie dear eddie,your like a spolit prince or rich boy who is upset because daddy took his credit card off him.I would of loved it keeganesqe i know,but i would have loved this board to have been around in bill foxes day when tea bags were squeezed to save money and we had gates of 5 thousand and our heroes were of the calibre of chris thompson ,sean curry and simon garner.I would have loved your reaction to the signings of steve archibald and ossie or the rumours we were trying to sign linekar......eddie what happens happens ,im not harping about the good old days im trying to say eddie live in the real world....we have been spoilt since jack walker splashed the cash.you asked as manc blue said monty python style wher e we would be without the walker money ....LOOK AT BRADFORD,BARNSLEY OR LEEDS

You raised a good point - hate to face reality but if it was not for Jack walker and even the current trusties I believe Rovers would have maybe gone under. Back in the Bill Fox days things were so bad that staff were told to share tea bags - it was touch and go for Rovers as a club to survive. Having witnessed those days I suggest survival in the prem season after season is for Rovers - in comparison to those days- success. The higher the position a bonus, pick up a trophy, qualify for Europe - again bonusess. Every football supporter wants their team to be at the top all the time - yet reality says that it will not and cannot ever happen. Rovers are a successful football club with what they have got now - staying in the prem is what stops them going under - because this is where the money is. As much as I would love Rovers to in the top 4, champions league etc - these are only hopeful bonuess - being an established club in the prem is what we may have to settle with for a while and hope for better things.

[American]

I've no idea what you are talking about. I understand the point Eddie is trying to make however you can't say this or that then make a point. Viewed in isolation then the trustees activities may seem poor for a Premiership club. However they would never have been involved in the club if it wasn't for Jack Walker so how can you view them in isolation.

You can easily view them in isolation, because they are the new owners. Yes, they are the owners because of the trust, but if we had the same sort of ownership that had bought the club from the trust, everyone would be ripping them to shreds.

So, no, that wasn't an idiotic statement, but was an over the top response. I see the point of both sides, but you don't need to call him an idiot for not agreeing with you.

[Ste B]

Can we please NOT post anybodys personal mobile numbers on here..

Unless of course the person concerned agrees to it.

[Iceman]

Why is there so much secrecy as to who are the bidders,and who wants to buy the club?surely the fans have a right to know who wants to buy the club,and have some sort of say on the matter.Im sure there are many supporters who were opposed to Hicks and Gillett taking over,and now that club is in a bit of a mess in the boardroom.

I wouldn’t want guys like that running a club like ours,whereby we are a close knit unit throughout management at the moment.If we get somebody taking over the club,I would still want to see the present management in place and too keep the club being well run on a day to day basis.

[only2garners]

Why is there so much secrecy as to who are the bidders,and who wants to buy the club?surely the fans have a right to know who wants to buy the club,and have some sort of say on the matter.Im sure there are many supporters who were opposed to Hicks and Gillett taking over,and now that club is in a bit of a mess in the boardroom.

I wouldn’t want guys like that running a club like ours,whereby we are a close knit unit throughout management at the moment.If we get somebody taking over the club,I would still want to see the present management in place and too keep the club being well run on a day to day basis.

Despite Nicko's comments about this bid moving quickly, we are still miles away yet from any agreed bid. They will be a long way form any period of due diligence starting, let alone being completed. Unless of course they follow Mike Ashley's style in buying first and then looking at the books later.

[S15]

eddie eddie dear eddie,your like a spolit prince or rich boy who is upset because daddy took his credit card off him.I would of loved it keeganesqe i know,but i would have loved this board to have been around in bill foxes day when tea bags were squeezed to save money and we had gates of 5 thousand and our heroes were of the calibre of chris thompson ,sean curry and simon garner.I would have loved your reaction to the signings of steve archibald and ossie or the rumours we were trying to sign linekar......eddie what happens happens ,im not harping about the good old days im trying to say eddie live in the real world....we have been spoilt since jack walker splashed the cash.you asked as manc blue said monty python style wher e we would be without the walker money ....LOOK AT BRADFORD,BARNSLEY OR LEEDS

Thing is this kind of talk is starting to sound like ones great grandparent telling you how lucky you are and ''you should have been here during the great war.''

In recent history, which is all us relatively young fans are old enough to remember, we have always been a successful (or atleast semi successful) team. In which case we whinge if we feel things aren't been done to maintain or push us on. It's called evolution. So be pleased with the progression, and stop being such a patronising ...............

[philipl]

Well If all you were saying is that they are doing a good job of keeping the likes of Ashley away from the club then that is a fair statement, if you were saying that they are actually doing a good job overall then I disagree. The trustees are fairly awful "owners". The only reason why any of our supporters are in the least bit content with them is because they have the good fortune of "carrying on" Jack Walker's legacy. If you ignore what Walker did for the club and view the trustees almost as a new set of owners, then you can't help but feel they are running a premiership club as if they owned a league 1 club, in terms of the amount they invest and the way they handle certain aspects of the business.

eddie, you had a brain exchange with a cockroach?

You used to be a decent poster but that is absolute buncum of the highest order. If you were to produce a table of total owner contributions since 2000 across all the Prem clubs, the Walker Trust would probably be about 5th in the current list of Premier clubs and owners.

[S15]

I don't know enough to take sides either way with regards to the trust, however, I know enough to know that the above statement is just plain not true.

[RevidgeBlue]

Eddie, Can you name me a League One club that has had £50m+ invested in the last 8 years.

Ta

Eddie is going somewhat over the top with his criticisms but to play devil's advocate if you take a slightly different time frame (the last five years since Duff was sold in the summer of 2003) the net investment in terms of transfer fees is more like the cost of RSC minus the cost of Savage - just over 2m.

That plainly is nowhere near enough to sustain a Premiership club in the longer term hence the numerous concerns that have been voiced.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Eddie is going somewhat over the top with his criticisms but to play devil's advocate if you take a slightly different time frame (the last five years since Duff was sold in the summer of 2003) the net investment in terms of transfer fees is more like the cost of RSC minus the cost of Savage - just over 2m.

That plainly is nowhere near enough to sustain a Premiership club hence the numerous concerns that have been voiced.

And this isn't just an arbitrary time frame to make a point. The Trust's approach today is night and day from that of 8 years ago when a loss of 27 million was made in our two years in the Championship. Equally, the subsequent free-spending years of Souness's two years in the Premier League bear no resemblance to today. Not many can match the 8-year investment, but plenty can beat the last 3 years. Something has changed.

It would be nice to hear from the owners as to why they want to sell, but since we haven't heard from them for seven years, we'll have to rely on rumour and gossip as to what's going on.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

eddie, you had a brain exchange with a cockroach?

You used to be a decent poster but that is absolute buncum of the highest order. If you were to produce a table of total owner contributions since 2000 across all the Prem clubs, the Walker Trust would probably be about 5th in the current list of Premier clubs and owners.

In Particular order, all have invested more than the Walkers since 2000

Chelsea

Tottenham

Middlesbrough

Newcastle

Aston Villa

Birmingham

Man City

Portsmouth

Wigan

Manchester Utd

[philipl]

Abramovich at Chelsea

Al Fayed at Fulham

Gibson at Boro

have put in more.

I am not clear on Whelan at Wigan and Gold/Sullivan at Brum.

You have to go back to the '90s to find the owners putting money into either Man U or Newcastle.

Spuds is sadly a money-making machine of a club and for every splurge of cash from ENIC there is a steady eight figure profit going back the other way.

I am excluding the cost of BUYING the clubs- I am talking purely about the money going into the club as an irrecoverable donation from the owners.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Abramovich at Chelsea

Al Fayed at Fulham

Gibson at Boro

have put in more.

I am not clear on Whelan at Wigan and Gold/Sullivan at Brum.

You have to go back to the '90s to find the owners putting money into either Man U or Newcastle.

Spuds is sadly a money-making machine of a club and for every splurge of cash from ENIC there is a steady eight figure profit going back the other way.

I am excluding the cost of BUYING the clubs- I am talking purely about the money going into the club as an irrecoverable donation from the owners.

I would imagine that gold/sullivan have put alot of there own money into brum as in there 4 seasons in the prem they have spent over 80 million on players yet have a smaller turnover than rovers.

Ashley has spent over a 130 milion at newcastle excluding the 85 million he paid to buy the club

Enic have stumped up vast sums of money perhaps 100 million investment in last 5 years.

Whelan is heavily subsidising wigan , look at there turnover compared to ours. Yet their net transfer spend is much higher

Thaksin has spent over a 100 million at man city in one year, clearing the clubs debts & investing half of that in new players.

[philipl]

I would imagine that gold/sullivan have put alot of there own money into brum as in there 4 seasons in the prem they have spent over 80 million on players yet have a smaller turnover than rovers.

Ashley has spent over a 130 milion at newcastle excluding the 85 million he paid to buy the club

Enic have stumped up vast sums of money perhaps 100 million investment in last 5 years.

Whelan is heavily subsidising wigan , look at there turnover compared to ours. Yet their net transfer spend is much higher

Thaksin has spent over a 100 million at man city in one year, clearing the clubs debts & investing half of that in new players.

In the case of Ashley and Thaksin, the take-over deals priced in the clearance of debts so I regard that as part of the cost of acquisition. They would have paid the exiting owners 130m and 100m respectively had they not handed over the debts with the clubs (City were £50m in debt, Newcastle £70m in debt so some debt has been rolled by both new owners to provide headroom for transfers). Thaksin has used his own money whilst there is third party money behind Ashley at Newcastle as well as his own cash.

I am not convinced by your ENIC argument- they have also used Spuds as a vehicle for raising cash and have sold shares to raise funds.

OK Brum and Wigan have probably benefitted more from their owners' largesse so the Walker Trust stands at number 6 in terms of Premier League owners' largesse.

That is the hurdle for the new owners to beat isn't it?

[ABBEY]

Thing is this kind of talk is starting to sound like ones great grandparent telling you how lucky you are and ''you should have been here during the great war.''

In recent history, which is all us relatively young fans are old enough to remember, we have always been a successful (or atleast semi successful) team. In which case we whinge if we feel things aren't been done to maintain or push us on. It's called evolution. So be pleased with the progression, and stop being such a patronising ..........

where am i patronising, mr bell ringer???

were have i said anything about progression??

young fans?? my son is 10 years old andf loves hearing thru vids,dvds,you tube ,his uncles etc telling him what it was like before we got spoilt.he spent ages on friday watching prem league win and also burnley in 2000 days before his grandad died.....so asfor young fans only caring about now shows what you are bout ...i love hearing about the rovers before i was born and how my grandad was on ewood against bolton for the largest gate in rovers history and how we won the cup three times on the run....

Removed

[Mc Love]

Why is the club only worth 25 million?? Does that mean that another club could buy us? I would be embarrassed if we were bought for that amount. That means that players like Ronaldo are worth more than a whole club!!

25 million includes the academy, ground, players etc etc....what a joke!

Also i think the trust should have invested more as the seasons changed, a lot has changed since Walker died and the payments should have increased as with the cost of living etc!

[joey_big_nose]

Why is the club only worth 25 million?? Does that mean that another club could buy us? I would be embarrassed if we were bought for that amount. That means that players like Ronaldo are worth more than a whole club!!

25 million includes the academy, ground, players etc etc....what a joke!

Also i think the trust should have invested more as the seasons changed, a lot has changed since Walker died and the payments should have increased as with the cost of living etc!

It doesn't really work like that. The value placed on the club is what it is worth to anyone that buys it. If the new owners could take the TV money, sell the squad (that alone would probably net 30m+) sell the ground, sell the facilities and buy nothing to replace any of that then I am sure the club would be worth hundreds of millions.

However that isn't what they buy. They get to run a football club where there are 20,000 supporters who watch their everymove and are backed up by football accosiations and the governemnt. They can't do any of that so in a way those assets are worth nothing to them. In fact they will almost certainly lose money, possibly bucket loads if we get relegated. Hence the cheapness. The trustees will sell for what people will pay.

Also, as an aside, from our point of view the cheaper the better as, theoretically at least, it means more money available for transfers.

[RevidgeBlue]

All that said, it's hard to take too seriously a reported bid for the club of 25m when one player alone (Bentley) arguably values at 15-20m.

[stuwilky]

Eddie is going somewhat over the top with his criticisms but to play devil's advocate if you take a slightly different time frame (the last five years since Duff was sold in the summer of 2003) the net investment in terms of transfer fees is more like the cost of RSC minus the cost of Savage - just over 2m.

That plainly is nowhere near enough to sustain a Premiership club in the longer term hence the numerous concerns that have been voiced.

Im not talking solely about transfer fees Rev. (But of course you know that.)

Im talking about investment, in total, into the football club.

Over 5 years, what will that be? Thick end of £30m?

[tony gale's mic]

All that said, it's hard to take too seriously a reported bid for the club of 25m when one player alone (Bentley) arguably values at 15-20m.

It doesn't work like that.

[BlueMonday]

All that said, it's hard to take too seriously a reported bid for the club of 25m when one player alone (Bentley) arguably values at 15-20m.

A sensible low bid. Its not just a case of what the club is 'worth'. but how much the trustee's are willing to off load us for. The two aren't neccessarily the same and if the trustee's are desparate. Well ??

U.T.B.