[Archived] Rovers Takeover Thread

[gillibrand]

Why don't the Trustees just let us go instead of destroying us?

[iamarover]

Why don't the Trustees just let us go instead of destroying us?

Genius. So er...lets see the odd flaw in that. Throwing £3m a year at the club is clearly sending Williams and the Board bonkers. Stop that throwing money Uncle Trustee. And the £110m write off? Well what you doing you mad old goat? Uncle I told you we needed £200m because NumptyMB on BRFCS says so. Yeah Uncle Trustee. £110m whoooh. Now then....all sorted. Uncle Trustee 'let us go'. OK? Go on...what do you mean to where? You crazy old fool...to ..er......er... I dont know. Those financial whizzbang soupsterson BRFCS sure know their onions. Ask them. Look under a stone in Accrington and there is bound to be a nutter ready to throw £10m a year at a fading football club isnt there? Or perhaps why don t we ring Dubai? Gah. No money. Uncle Hicks and Gillett...darn. Thieving monkeys. Cuddly old Mr Glazer? Bah...hmmmm. Hold on. Yes Mr Ash. Er....Roman Bloodmoneyavich? Mr GunnergobusticelandHammer? The list goes on. loads of them out there. Hmmmm

[gillibrand]

Genius. So er...lets see the odd flaw in that. Throwing £3m a year at the club is clearly sending Williams and the Board bonkers. Stop that throwing money Uncle Trustee. And the £110m write off? Well what you doing you mad old goat? Uncle I told you we needed £200m because NumptyMB on BRFCS says so. Yeah Uncle Trustee. £110m whoooh. Now then....all sorted. Uncle Trustee 'let us go'. OK? Go on...what do you mean to where? You crazy old fool...to ..er......er... I dont know. Those financial whizzbang soupsterson BRFCS sure know their onions. Ask them. Look under a stone in Accrington and there is bound to be a nutter ready to throw £10m a year at a fading football club isnt there? Or perhaps why don t we ring Dubai? Gah. No money. Uncle Hicks and Gillett...darn. Thieving monkeys. Cuddly old Mr Glazer? Bah...hmmmm. Hold on. Yes Mr Ash. Er....Roman Bloodmoneyavich? Mr GunnergobusticelandHammer? The list goes on. loads of them out there. Hmmmm

If you have sobered up now, what I was referring to was the too high a valuation they have slapped on the Rovers!

[John]

Quite worrying....

[philipl]

Extremely worrying and it shows how totally wrong certain people are who were saying the Trust would benefit from Rovers being relegated.

Incidentally the £56m turnover John Williams mentions means there is a £4m hole compared with the turnover I had expected for last year based on the previous year adjusted for the Sky increase.

The 85% of turnover in wages statistic is the figure for 2006/7 when the Trust deliberately allowed the club to invest in players ahead of the new Sky deal inflation. If the club kept wages to its £40m budget figure, then the proportion paid in wages will be about 71%.

Now does Eddie understand why we gave up chasing Diarra when his wages got bid up to £3m a year?

Three years ago £56m would have put us into the 25 largest clubs in the world by the way.

[tony gale's mic]

Staying up this season is so utterly crucial...

[philipl]

PS If you wonder why West Ham and Pompey are having a clear out, their wage bills were just under £60m the year before last. But then it is always Rovers' wage ratio folks talk about....

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Staying up this season is so utterly crucial...

Staying up is crucial every year. It just shows how the Sky money has risen hugely - even with Jack alive, we would have struggled to maintain the squad in the same way we did last time we were relegated.

I think it shows how the Sky money (in many ways) has ruined the game. Teams are too frightened to take a gamble on young players, managers etc etc. In many ways all the c**p written in the press recently has really pi**ed me off - as none of them seem to applaud Rovers for taking a gamble on a young and up coming manager.

[tony gale's mic]

Well, I don't think appointing Ince deserves any kind of applause, appointing the right manager deserves applause but any old chairman can pick a decent looking manager from League Two and hopes he does well.

What has got on my nerves is those saying we were wrong to sack him...

[Tris]

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

With Mike Ashley announcing today that Newcastle is no longer for sale, Keith Harris must be feeling a bit stupid. It's only a few weeks since his smug mug was on Sky Sports News making it sound like there was an auction going on between two great candidates to buy the club.

It now seems that he was lying through his arse to try and generate some more interest.

A happy day all round for the Geordie faithful with the mags 5-1 down to Liverpool at St James Park, Owen refusing to sign the new contrat and Kinnear in charge until May.

[Bobby G]

Only a fool would buy a football club in this financial climate.

Then again only a fool would buy Newcastle during any climate.

[Tim Southampton Rover]

Can someone explain why it would be a bad time for foreign investors to invest into a club considering how our currency is crap compared to others at the moment? Would it not be worse for the sellers rather than the buyers?

Surely they'd get the club cheaper than usual whilst making more money in the future through media rights etc?

[philipl]

1) you have a 3 in 20 chance every season of getting relegated and losing all your capital value and taking a £30m+ to revenues MINIMUM

2) Charlton lost all their foreign investors' money, West Ham and Pompey now losing theirs'- Liverpool soon, Man U in 2010- foreign owners are taking a deep cold bath in the EPL. Even Abramovich is shivering.

3) The sorts of flash folks who might buy an EPL club are the sorts who have lost 50%+ of their paper value in the last five months

4) The next TV deal is anybody's guess

Premier League clubs are playthings and status symbols and there is zip cash left for those sorts of playthings.

[Stuart]

1) you have a 3 in 20 chance every season of getting relegated and losing all your capital value and taking a £30m+ to revenues MINIMUM

2) Charlton lost all their foreign investors' money, West Ham and Pompey now losing theirs'- Liverpool soon, Man U in 2010- foreign owners are taking a deep cold bath in the EPL. Even Abramovich is shivering.

3) The sorts of flash folks who might buy an EPL club are the sorts who have lost 50%+ of their paper value in the last five months

4) The next TV deal is anybody's guess

Premier League clubs are playthings and status symbols and there is zip cash left for those sorts of playthings.

Phillip, what is your prediction for football over the next 5 years given the market conditions you describe? For instance, will the gap between Premiership and Championship reduce, at least in financial terms?

I'm not going to hold you to it and slag you off if you're wrong I'm just curious of the view from a financial analyst's point of view.

[philipl]

The size of the gap between the Premier League and Championship in part depends on the Premier League maintaining and extending its lead over all other major leagues.

Whilst the Prem is somewhat hamstrung by the likes of the Glazers and Hick/Gillet who could have created clubs of unbelievable strength but have instead held Man U and Liverpool back relatively speaking, Serie A is still in a poorish state and La Liga has receded relatively speaking with only the much poorer German League looking financially healthy and gaining in strength relatively. Le Championat de Lyon scarcely counts.

So the PL looks to have a commanding league in the global soccer market and whilst that lasts, it should at least not suffer dramatically were the domestic TV market to go sharply in reverse. So whilst PL media income might decline, a worst case scenario might be by 25% maximum which is still going to leave it wildly richer than the Championship or any other league in the world.

My guess is we will see a PL-influenced semi-league emerge at the top of the Championship where the sheer size of the parachute payments is already beginning to distort the competitiveness of the Championship which is its biggest selling point. Reading and Brum are 2nd and 3rd now and I cannot see Derby failing to put together a challenging team for 09/10 where they will meet three more clubs benefitting from parachute payments which more-or-less double their turnover compared with ordinary Championship clubs.

[Stuart]

The size of the gap between the Premier League and Championship in part depends on the Premier League maintaining and extending its lead over all other major leagues.

Whilst the Prem is somewhat hamstrung by the likes of the Glazers and Hick/Gillet who could have created clubs of unbelievable strength but have instead held Man U and Liverpool back relatively speaking, Serie A is still in a poorish state and La Liga has receded relatively speaking with only the much poorer German League looking financially healthy and gaining in strength relatively. Le Championat de Lyon scarcely counts.

So the PL looks to have a commanding league in the global soccer market and whilst that lasts, it should at least not suffer dramatically were the domestic TV market to go sharply in reverse. So whilst PL media income might decline, a worst case scenario might be by 25% maximum which is still going to leave it wildly richer than the Championship or any other league in the world.

My guess is we will see a PL-influenced semi-league emerge at the top of the Championship where the sheer size of the parachute payments is already beginning to distort the competitiveness of the Championship which is its biggest selling point. Reading and Brum are 2nd and 3rd now and I cannot see Derby failing to put together a challenging team for 09/10 where they will meet three more clubs benefitting from parachute payments which more-or-less double their turnover compared with ordinary Championship clubs.

Couple of follow up questions, if you don't mind.

1) If "PL media income" declines by 25%, won't this hit smaller-fan-based clubs such as Rovers much more than those with larger ones? Things such as ticket sales and merchandising spring to mind as the main sources of income aside from TV and 'foreign investment'. This is more likely to lead to an informal split within the Premier League with the larger-fan-base 'haves' battling every year for Titles, Champions League and European football and the 'have-nots' scrapping to stay in the league. Pretty much as it is now but even more polarised and even less surprises (e.g. Hull). I guess the first question is how hard would this 25% reduction affect the teams 11 - 20?

2) Would the 'PL-influenced semi-league' be a formal arrangement or are you talking about a monetary split causing yo-yo clubs as an extension to the current PL20? In effect the same 23 teams rotating in and out of the PL every other season.

Extending your supposition could this lead to a further tier in English football? I think it's been touted before (certainly on this board) as PL1 and PL2, perhaps 10 and 16 teams respectively. This would reduce the Championship to 18 teams. Is this a viable option? Would a PL2 be afflicted by middle-child syndrome and give even less credibility to the Championship? Any such arrangement might require the Football League more power in the final structure as they have most to lose and I doubt the Premier League would allow that power (and wealth) to be shared.

In such a world, if Rovers were to be taken over by a rich investor it could be the difference between PL1 and Championship football, given our reliance (compared to other clubs) on TV money. Given the potential landscape over the coming years, is it a case of get a big investor or become a League one team? Even if we survive this year is the lack of investment simply delaying the inevitable? Although Mike Ashley is proof that financial backing is no guarantee.

Sorry, that turned into a lot of questions - some rhetorical. Any general thoughts?

[philipl]

Couple of follow up questions, if you don't mind.

1) If "PL media income" declines by 25%, won't this hit smaller-fan-based clubs such as Rovers much more than those with larger ones? Things such as ticket sales and merchandising spring to mind as the main sources of income aside from TV and 'foreign investment'. This is more likely to lead to an informal split within the Premier League with the larger-fan-base 'haves' battling every year for Titles, Champions League and European football and the 'have-nots' scrapping to stay in the league. Pretty much as it is now but even more polarised and even less surprises (e.g. Hull). I guess the first question is how hard would this 25% reduction affect the teams 11 - 20?

PL-

I must emphasise the 25% figure is a guess as to the most the media deal might decline by- that would be reflecting a continuing increase in global revenues of perhaps as much as another 50% offsetting a decline in UK revenues by over one third. At this stage, I think the most likely outcome will be UK revenues holding relatively steady as Setanta are probably going to find a buyer from somewhere producing a modest overall increase driven by bigger fees globally.

Whilst the Premier League maintains its current structure for distributing income then the smaller/less successful clubs benefit disproportionately (and suffer equally disproportionately if media revenues decrease). The strength of the Premier League is that all the clubs lower down are financially many times stronger than their counterparts in Spain or Italy where individual clubs do their own media deals.

2) Would the 'PL-influenced semi-league' be a formal arrangement or are you talking about a monetary split causing yo-yo clubs as an extension to the current PL20? In effect the same 23 teams rotating in and out of the PL every other season.

PL- no it wouldn't be a formal arrangement. But you could see three or four clubs becoming relegation battlers in the Prem because they had been hamstrung by having very recent time in the Championship whilst three or four in the Championship are pushing for promotion because of the parachute moneys.

However, this season the PL has taken a very odd shape even though the odds on Hull, West Brom and Stoke going down together must be shortening- established PL clubs invariably have half a dozen more PL quality players in their squads than newly promoted squads and as the season wears on, that lack of strength in depth gets exposed. Similarly if a West Ham or Pompey get relegated because of financial difficulties, those trouble will go with them into the Championship and the parachute would be a paliative rather than a cure pointing to a Charlton/Southampton/Norwich/Ipswich fate rather than a yoyo existance.

Extending your supposition could this lead to a further tier in English football? I think it's been touted before (certainly on this board) as PL1 and PL2, perhaps 10 and 16 teams respectively. This would reduce the Championship to 18 teams. Is this a viable option? Would a PL2 be afflicted by middle-child syndrome and give even less credibility to the Championship? Any such arrangement might require the Football League more power in the final structure as they have most to lose and I doubt the Premier League would allow that power (and wealth) to be shared.

PL- In the current climate, nobody is going to give up anything so PL1 and PL2 will not happen

In such a world, if Rovers were to be taken over by a rich investor it could be the difference between PL1 and Championship football, given our reliance (compared to other clubs) on TV money. Given the potential landscape over the coming years, is it a case of get a big investor or become a League one team? Even if we survive this year is the lack of investment simply delaying the inevitable? Although Mike Ashley is proof that financial backing is no guarantee.

Sorry, that turned into a lot of questions - some rhetorical. Any general thoughts?

I think Rovers' future financially is relatively OK in WT ownership if we can not only escape the relegation places but kick on up the table- every place is worth £750K. Liverpool, Everton, Pompey, West Ham, Newcastle and Charlton fans were all delighted with their new owners at one time. Only at Villa has the honeymoon continued and is still happening. City remains a bedroom farce and I would be amazed if in the current climate ADUG even match Abramovich's £400m+ expenditure on the playing side over five years, never mind exceed it.

[joey_big_nose]

Whilst the Prem is somewhat hamstrung by the likes of the Glazers and Hick/Gillet who could have created clubs of unbelievable strength but have instead held Man U and Liverpool back relatively speaking, Serie A is still in a poorish state and La Liga has receded relatively speaking with only the much poorer German League looking financially healthy and gaining in strength relatively. Le Championat de Lyon scarcely counts.

I am often impressed with your financial post Phillip, but this thing with ManU/Liverpool still surprises me. How have the Glazers undone Man Utd's success? They have heavily invested in the squad each year to the tune of 40-50 million quid, not interfered with Ferguson, and there is no indication that funds will be restricted (I mean they laid out 32m on Berbatov for God's sake!)

Liverpool could not match that at all under previous owners, but now with the (admittedly bickering) American duo they have upped their expenditure to be in the same ball park as Man Utd or Chelsea - Torres, Mascherano, Keane, Babel, Riera etc cost a packet.

I suppose it is a referance to the future for the clubs, financial annihilation or something like that next year or the year after. Unfortunately you have been forcasting these dire circumstances for about three years now, yet everything seems to be ticking along just fine! So I will believe it when I see it...

[Stuart]

In fairness to Phillip it's only a forecast based on the market intelligence at hand with some experience thrown in, he doesn't know the future. I mean who knows how long this recession is going to last. I've heard that it's going to get really grim on the one hand but on the other that the US are going to come out of it fairly soon. Dragging this back to topic (although I did kind of drag it off) I imagine any takeover at Rovers will require the financial/oil/property markets to improve first. I mean, look at Mike Ashley, he's now decided that no-one wants to buy his club and has taken the sign down.

[American]

I am often impressed with your financial post Phillip, but this thing with ManU/Liverpool still surprises me. How have the Glazers undone Man Utd's success? They have heavily invested in the squad each year to the tune of 40-50 million quid, not interfered with Ferguson, and there is no indication that funds will be restricted (I mean they laid out 32m on Berbatov for God's sake!)

Liverpool could not match that at all under previous owners, but now with the (admittedly bickering) American duo they have upped their expenditure to be in the same ball park as Man Utd or Chelsea - Torres, Mascherano, Keane, Babel, Riera etc cost a packet.

I suppose it is a referance to the future for the clubs, financial annihilation or something like that next year or the year after. Unfortunately you have been forcasting these dire circumstances for about three years now, yet everything seems to be ticking along just fine! So I will believe it when I see it...

I think the point is that they COULD be investing 60-70 million a year into the squad. Not sure how much that would help, though, as a settled squad with just a couple of additions seems to be what helped United win the past few years and what is helping Liverpool do well this season.

What United do seem to be doing, probably because of a lower than possible budget, is going out and getting younger players, such as Nani and Anderson, and allowing them time to get settled into the squad. I don't remember the names, but it looks like he's after signing a couple of teenagers in January for under 10 million each. If any of the 4 mentioned turn into even half the player as Ronaldo is, Fergie will be doing well.

[PAFELL]

In fairness to Phillip it's only a forecast based on the market intelligence at hand with some experience thrown in, he doesn't know the future. I mean who knows how long this recession is going to last. I've heard that it's going to get really grim on the one hand but on the other that the US are going to come out of it fairly soon. Dragging this back to topic (although I did kind of drag it off) I imagine any takeover at Rovers will require the financial/oil/property markets to improve first. I mean, look at Mike Ashley, he's now decided that no-one wants to buy his club and has taken the sign down.

He should have taken the price down a long time ago. he wanted to much back in a sale.

Rovers will not be taken over for a long long time. The only hope for rovers is that the trustees decide to invest more in the playing squad, the squad become succsessful - by being involved in the champions league season in season out. But becaus ethe trustees are not fully commited to Rovers they will not buy the required players and therefore the club will always flirt with relegation season after season.

Though this season may actually teach the trustees a mighty lesson - if Rovers went bust because of relegation - they wouldn't receive much back on Jack's original investment. I do not believe the trustees want to risk that. So Rovers may have a bad and survive this season in the prem, and the trustees receive a wake up call. Which should work in rovers favour.

The trustee's appeared to panic as Rovers slide down the table and so they should.

[yoda]

What's your view on the accounts Philipl

they are looking good to me, as long as we stay up

[Hughesy]

Phil when are the accounts for rovers out??

The futures bright, the futures Blue and White!!

[yoda]

Phil when are the accounts for rovers out??

The futures bright, the futures Blue and White!!

they are out now i belive, showing an operating profit of £7 million

[Hughesy]

Seriously?? Anyone got a copy, send me if you can.