[Archived] Rovers Takeover Thread

[ABBEY]

Twaites Rovers, some how I can't see a Nike Rovers, nice as it would be £££££££

and to think we called chelsea "rent boys"......ITS BLACKBURN ROVERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE DAY WE STOP AND SELL OUR SOUL IS THE DAY I STOP BEING A FOOTBALL FAN.

[67splitscreen]

and to think we called chelsea "rent boys"......ITS BLACKBURN ROVERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE DAY WE STOP AND SELL OUR SOUL IS THE DAY I STOP BEING A FOOTBALL FAN.

FFS get a life, :lol: of course it is. It all started and ends in Blackburn.

[DingleBaiter]

and to think we called chelsea "rent boys"......ITS BLACKBURN ROVERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE DAY WE STOP AND SELL OUR SOUL IS THE DAY I STOP BEING A FOOTBALL FAN.

So what part constitutes 'selling our soul'?

• Shirt sponsorship?
• Stand sponsorship?
• Player sponsorship?
• Cable TV effectively ruling fixtures?
• Image rights for players?
• Personal appearances, marketing of players/events?

All these were predicted as ending our game - but they seem pretty accepted now. Why not think for a minute? Stop being so narrow-minded and have faith that we've actually got a club that stands for it's values.

Bet you were moaning about John Williams being appointed too - despite the fact we wouldn't be were we are today without him.

[ABBEY]

JHC...ITS LIKE HAVING A BLOODY STALKER.....every post and master is there....

read what i said fcs.

show me once were ive slagged john williams.Nothing wrong with shirt sponsers or players.But whats wrong with not wanting our name changed, what if a building society in a certain town wanted to pump money in you would be ok with BURNLEY ROVERS or KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN ROVERS or a waste disposale company takes over and calls us shIIIIIy rovers,

there are some things you can do but changing a teams id in the name of money is wrong. dbaiter im going out in five minutes so i will check you reply in two hours if thats ok with you boss.

[67splitscreen]

It's going way off topic, so I'll leave it to the two of you.

[JAL]

I'm just quoting this so the idiot can't change it in the morning ... before I use the ignore function for only the second time ever.

You need to get out of Blackburn and the north west more often if you can get out of your liittle comfort zone with your small town mentality.

[gazsimm]

You need to get out of Blackburn and the north west more often if you can get out of your liittle comfort zone with your small town mentality.

to be truthfull JAL, Tris is right on this one. The name Blackburn Rovers should never be changed anyway, if it ever does change, Blackburn should always be mentioned in the name.

[bellamy11]

You need to get out of Blackburn and the north west more often if you can get out of your liittle comfort zone with your small town mentality.

Absolutely. I have it on good authority that Tris has never been outside of Blackburn or Darwen

[philipl]

This is by far the most revealing article on football take-overs this year probably. Keith Harris talking to the Guardian.

And here in a nutshell is the reason why Rovers have not been bought and probably never will be:

Explaining the motives of the businessmen coming in, Harris said they regard football clubs as "trophy assets" but he also convinces them they can make substantial profits without having to put additional money into the clubs after buying them.

"I have been able to demonstrate that if you do it correctly, the club should generate sufficient cash to fund itself, so having bought it you shouldn't have to put more money in unless you choose to. And you can generate a return of 5-10% in the value of the club every year over a period of seven to 10 years."

Lerner, whose sensitive and shrewd stewardship of Aston Villa is the deal of which Harris is most proud, plans to own Villa for just that, seven to 10 years.

[dave birch]

This is by far the most revealing article on football take-overs this year probably. Keith Harris talking to the Guardian.

"I have been able to demonstrate that if you do it correctly, the club should generate sufficient cash to fund itself, so having bought it you shouldn't have to put more money in unless you choose to. And you can generate a return of 5-10% in the value of the club every year over a period of seven to 10 years."

Lerner, whose sensitive and shrewd stewardship of Aston Villa is the deal of which Harris is most proud, plans to own Villa for just that, seven to 10 years.

I'd love to see that "demonstration".

There are so many variables it's not funny, from Platini to FIFA to global economics. How he can take all that into account and still show that an investment can make money is laughable. There's a good chance that putting money under the bed would give a better return over ten years.

[philipl]

I'd love to see that "demonstration".

There are so many variables it's not funny, from Platini to FIFA to global economics. How he can take all that into account and still show that an investment can make money is laughable. There's a good chance that putting money under the bed would give a better return over ten years.

When you see the results of football clubs this year, you will conclude that only a 5 to 10% return represents considerable profligacy which of course exists. The new media deal which cut in for 2007/8 has made an enormous difference.

[67splitscreen]

And when the TV companys cut back as they surely will, Then what. ??????

[dave birch]

When you see the results of football clubs this year, you will conclude that only a 5 to 10% return represents considerable profligacy which of course exists. The new media deal which cut in for 2007/8 has made an enormous difference.

"This year"!

Harris is/was talking 7- 10 years.

How long does the media deal go for?

And what is this supposed to mean-"you will conclude that only a 5 to 10% return represents considerable profligacy which of course exists."? Were they expecting more?

[philipl]

And when the TV companys cut back as they surely will, Then what. ??????

If Rovers didn't have the managerial problems we now have, we'd be sitting very pretty actually.

As for the buyers of these "prestige-assets", caveat emptor.

In reality, a club like Newcastle is so badly run, it will be difficult not to make money if the new owner is willing to go in there with a plentiful supply of P45s.

[Paul]

I didn't hear all of this programme as I was diving in and out of the car at the time but it sounded both interesting and revealing File on 4 - Football and the Tax Man It's repeated on Sunday at 5.00pm or there is a podcast I shall down later.

The bits I heard make you wonder how on earth some clubs have been allowed to continue trading. One current owner, Luton I think, went as far as to say it was neccessary to allow clubs to go into liquidation to ensure they continued to survive. Luton have gone under three times in the last ten years, effectively there finances are such that liquidation every so often is almost part of the plan!! An individual who was trying to buy Mansfield openly declared he didn't need a single supporter to turn up, didn't care if they did or not, as the sponsorship deals were enought to make the club profitable. The current owner of Sheffield Wednesday, £30m in debt, made it abundantly clear he wants two things - to sell up to ANYONE and have his loans repaid. Currently he is negotiating with third parties who have been shown to be a front for one of Europe's leading money launderers. The Sheffield Wednesday owner clearly did not care one jot about their background.

And then we had Malwhinney blathering on about fit and proper persons. It's all a bit of a joke really, problem is who are the butt of the joke?

[67splitscreen]

If Rovers didn't have the managerial problems we now have, we'd be sitting very pretty actually.

As for the buyers of these "prestige-assets", caveat emptor.

In reality, a club like Newcastle is so badly run, it will be difficult not to make money if the new owner is willing to go in there with a plentiful supply of P45s.

Just always have to get that one in, philipl. In virtually every thread, blame Ince.

[CAPT KAYOS]

And then we had Malwhinney blathering on about fit and proper persons. It's all a bit of a joke really, problem is who are the butt of the joke?

Simple answer there Paul - The Fans

[92er]

This is by far the most revealing article on football take-overs this year probably. Keith Harris talking to the Guardian

The Daily Telegraph also covered the story, but in less depth.

They highlighted the problems of Everton-"...there is no progress at all. The demographics of Liverpool as an area are not hugely compelling. It has never been more difficult to find buyers. It's no longer a question of price negotiation, it's should we?"

I thought that pretty much covered us.

[Alan75]

I didn't hear all of this programme as I was diving in and out of the car at the time but it sounded both interesting and revealing File on 4 - Football and the Tax Man It's repeated on Sunday at 5.00pm or there is a podcast I shall down later.

I'd stick to the bike then, it would be a lot safer

[philipl]

The Daily Telegraph also covered the story, but in less depth.

They highlighted the problems of Everton-"...there is no progress at all. The demographics of Liverpool as an area are not hugely compelling. It has never been more difficult to find buyers. It's no longer a question of price negotiation, it's should we?"

I thought that pretty much covered us.

I didn't see that article but I'd say the alarm bells must be ringing at Liverpool FC who share the same demographics. Unlike Everton, they HAVE to be sold to avoid massive problems.

[92er]

I didn't see that article but I'd say the alarm bells must be ringing at Liverpool FC who share the same demographics. Unlike Everton, they HAVE to be sold to avoid massive problems.

What he said about Liverpool was "they could face serious problems if they cannot pay back their £ 350 mil debt. It's due in January, with maybe a 6-month extension. The 2 banks which are the principal lenders, RBS and Wachovia, are 2 of those that have suffered. Whether they want to lend it again, or not, they may not be able to do."

[Billy Castell]

So they may not extend the loan then and call it in?

I doubt the current climate will encourage anyone other than Arab loons who will want Kaka and other superstars on £400,000 p/w contracts. The sort that expects their team to win the Champions league every season and sacks the manager if they don't.

[JAL]

to be truthfull JAL, Tris is right on this one. The name Blackburn Rovers should never be changed anyway, if it ever does change, Blackburn should always be mentioned in the name.

Fair enough gazsimm, think I overreacted to a comment Tris made she/he certainly caught me there. The debate seemed to centre around how much were you prepared to allow changes to the club name have always thought when the national media call us Blackburn I kind of find them being derogatory towards Rovers or at least thats their perception I feel.

I would certainly love for the club to remain always as its founder name but see massive investment put into the road structure in and around Ewood Park with a bus lane the land along the railway line has definite future potential. just hope someone can come along and utilise it one day.

Arte et labore

Long live Blackburn Rovers !!!

[Paul]

What he said about Liverpool was "they could face serious problems if they cannot pay back their £ 350 mil debt. It's due in January, with maybe a 6-month extension. The 2 banks which are the principal lenders, RBS and Wachovia, are 2 of those that have suffered. Whether they want to lend it again, or not, they may not be able to do."

The closing sentence was along the lines of "Which bank would be brave enough to put Liverpool into liquidation". They don't really have a problem, just good headlines.

[philipl]

The closing sentence was along the lines of "Which bank would be brave enough to put Liverpool into liquidation". They don't really have a problem, just good headlines.

Wachovia would certainly be brave enough to bust LFC.

After all, you see a Wachovia/Wells Fargo branch on every other corner in Liverpool and the new Obama administration has this thing about not protecting non-American jobs.