[Archived] Rovers Takeover Thread

[Billy Castell]

Thinking about it, being 'the club that liquidated Liverpool' would pee off so many fans, that customers may be moved to take their money elsewhere. Or it might make a number of Everton and Man U fans open new accounts.

[philipl]

Thinking about it, being 'the club that liquidated Liverpool' would pee off so many fans, that customers may be moved to take their money elsewhere. Or it might make a number of Everton and Man U fans open new accounts.

Billy, its totally irrelevant to the joint lead bank- Wachovia/Wells Fargo

[jim mk2]

I am getting slower in my old age but with the lack of investment in players and the hiring of a cheap and not so cheerful manager it's all becoming crystal clear now.

The family in Jersey have obviously cut off all meaningful funding and have left the club to its fate. They don't care if Rovers are relegated.

Bast@rds.

[jim mk2]

H

[RevidgeBlue]

Surely the focus of the fans ire should not so much be on the current manager and replacing him with some other poor sod who will be expected to keep us running in the top half of the Prem on a transfer budget that would make most Championship Clubs blush.

The focus should be on the role and duties of the Trustees.

Do they have obligations under the terms of Jack's will or not?

If they have, (and they certainly supported the club admirably in the two or three years after Jack's death) how on earth can they have been fulfilling those obligations in recent seasons?

[philipl]

They converted £110m of debt into equity.

[RevidgeBlue]

They converted £110m of debt into equity.

Put like that, the question almost sounds like a "What have the Romans ever done for us?" scenario.

However whilst it might sound ungrateful the fact still remains that the Club need a workable transfer budget on the playing side of things as well.

If BRFC was a manufacturing business the Trustees couldn't expect to be praised if they didn't maintain or replace the machines and they all went to rack and ruin as a result.

[92er]

Ince must have paid out £5 mil for Grella, Andrews and the additional money needed for Robinson.

Presumably the club have set to one side the fee for Carlos - £4 mil?

And if the deal had not fallen through at the last minute, presumably another £5 mil was going for the purchase of a right winger.

I'm not sure how far MH was backed-Philip has argued, I think, that some of the backing was by extending the overdraft i the lead up to the most recent tv deal.

And of course the trustees have not taken any money out in the form of salary or dividends.

[RevidgeBlue]

Ince must have paid out £5 mil for Grella, Andrews and the additional money needed for Robinson.

After Bentley's sale that's still 4m in the black at a time when the squad needed net investment though.

[PAFELL]

They converted £110m of debt into equity.

How long ago was that? As they do not seem to be doing anything today. May be they would be happy to allow the club to be relegatd to make a sale of the easier.

[RevidgeBlue]

And of course the trustees have not taken any money out in the form of salary or dividends.

I'm sure they're extremely handsomely paid at a professional hourly rate for administering the Trust though.

[Mc Love]

How would letting the club drop into championship make it easier to sell??

[PAFELL]

How would letting the club drop into championship make it easier to sell??

I do not know if it would or not - just considering the possible motives for the current lack of committment of the trusties in funding Rovers properly. Apart from wanting to sell - not caring - what other motive could there be?

[philipl]

After Bentley's sale that's still 4m in the black at a time when the squad needed net investment though.

My belief is that during last summer

1) Ince did not put any purchase targets forwards that were available other than Fowler, Andrews and Bunn and got stroppy when questioned whether these were appropriate

2) Everything else was video-based research and asking agents as the Ince team was out of touch at Premier League level

3) When Bentley got sold Ince told the board what he said publicly- that Emerton was the player to replace him

4) The board very rapidly loss faith in his transfer judgement

The investment case for each signing would need to have been made but he certainly would have picked up at least the £10m budget Hughes was given and probably another £5m besides (the Trustees new donation and some of the profit on the Managerial change).

At the end of the summer, that £15m had turned into an £8m profit (Bentley and Friedel out; Robinson, Grella, Andrews, Bunn and Villanueva loan fee in)- a £23m swing and we'd had eight weeks to react to Bentley's sale, not the 80 minutes Spurs had when Berbatov went.

I would be very surprised if the £15m overdraft facility which the club would have continued had Hughes not left is not off the table now. The credit crunch almost certainly means the bank will have withdrawn the facility. That said, Rovers as a business proposition in 19th is a 100% worse banking proposition than when we were in 7th- Ince missed his chance to spend big by not doing so this summer and that in hindsight could well turn out to be his biggest positive contribution to Rovers. However, as nicko says, there is still money to spend in January even after provisioning £3m for Villanueva and before counting income from the sale of RSC.

Even if you factor in losing £7.5m in prize money (let's be optimistic and say we are now budgeting for 17th) and perhaps £3m from loss of gate and commercial revenue, Rovers should still be cash generative and profitable in 08/09 simply because the Sky deal is so massive. The club has got to maintain an extremely tight squeeze on wages though.

The question is who will be spending the small, but by Rovers' standards significant, transfer budget in January?

I wouldn't trust Ince with it and I doubt the Board will.

[philipl]

I'm sure they're extremely handsomely paid at a professional hourly rate for administering the Trust though.

By the Trust, not Blackburn Rovers.

Irrelevant point.

Incidentally on the subject of Rovers being taken over by anybody any time soon- I simply don't see it happening in the current climate.

[PAFELL]

My belief is that during last summer

1) Ince did not put any purchase targets forwards that were available other than Fowler, Andrews and Bunn and got stroppy when questioned whether these were appropriate

2) Everything else was video-based research and asking agents as the Ince team was out of touch at Premier League level

3) When Bentley got sold Ince told the board what he said publicly- that Emerton was the player to replace him

4) The board very rapidly loss faith in his transfer judgement

The investment case for each signing would need to have been made but he certainly would have picked up at least the £10m budget Hughes was given and probably another £5m besides (the Trustees new donation and some of the profit on the Managerial change).

At the end of the summer, that £15m had turned into an £8m profit (Bentley and Friedel out; Robinson, Grella, Andrews, Bunn and Villanueva loan fee in)- a £23m swing and we'd had eight weeks to react to Bentley's sale, not the 80 minutes Spurs had when Berbatov went.

I would be very surprised if the £15m overdraft facility which the club would have continued had Hughes not left is not off the table now. The credit crunch almost certainly means the bank will have withdrawn the facility. That said, Rovers as a business proposition in 19th is a 100% worse banking proposition than when we were in 7th- Ince missed his chance to spend big by not doing so this summer and that in hindsight could well turn out to be his biggest positive contribution to Rovers. However, as nicko says, there is still money to spend in January even after provisioning £3m for Villanueva and before counting income from the sale of RSC.

Even if you factor in losing £7.5m in prize money (let's be optimistic and say we are now budgeting for 17th) and perhaps £3m from loss of gate and commercial revenue, Rovers should still be cash generative and profitable in 08/09 simply because the Sky deal is so massive. The club has got to maintain an extremely tight squeeze on wages though.

The question is who will be spending the small, but by Rovers' standards significant, transfer budget in January?

I wouldn't trust Ince with it and I doubt the Board will.

Would not the sacking of Ince and his staff cost Rovers moneywise in compensation etc - dwindle the transfer budget further. Then there would be the money needed to bring in a new manager and their staff.

Credit cruch surely works in different ways as well - transfer fees could even come down as well as wages. WHU may need to sell many of their high earners - but the crunch means that they would not be able to sell for as much as they would hope, because clubs cannot afford the fees. Banks will not allow further debt to increase for clubs - so players will only be able to be sold to clubs with cash up front or who are not in debt.

With regards to placement money - Rovers are fortunate at the moment that the league is fairly open. If the team - hopefully under a new manager - put a decent run together they could still finish in the top 10.

Could any pressure be put on the trusties to do more for Rovers financially.

By the Trust, not Blackburn Rovers.

Irrelevant point.

Incidentally on the subject of Rovers being taken over by anybody any time soon- I simply don't see it happening in the current climate.

Totally agree.

Is it known how well or not the trusties have been doing in the current climate? Is the club in safe hands with the trusties financially? Could the trusties go bust for example?

[Eddie]

Philip, I love how you continually pass off pure speculation as fact.

[philipl]

Philip, I love how you continually pass off pure speculation as fact.

DReam on Eddie

[Eddie]

So you know all of what you have just posted as fact to be true?

[philipl]

So you know all of what you have just posted as fact to be true?

Best estimates- lets see what the published accounts show; they will be published within the next few weeks.

[modes98]

If Newcastle, Everton and Pompey can't be sold then I don't hold out much hope for us in the near future.

[philipl]

If Newcastle, Everton and Pompey can't be sold then I don't hold out much hope for us in the near future.

Add Liverpool, Spurs and West Ham to that list.

[joey_big_nose]

Best estimates- lets see what the published accounts show; they will be published within the next few weeks.

Come on! You massively over reach anything on a factual level, you are taking massive guesses. The hilarious thing about it is that you are extremely frequently wrong yet it doesn't diminish your appetite for speculation.

[philipl]

Sheard takeover of Sheff Wed "dead"

[gillibrand]

I think this is a pointless thread, maybe we should be valued the same as Woolworth's, that is the only chance of a bit of interest the way we are preforming!