[Archived] Rovers Takeover Thread

[Guest Vinjay606]

Why would the individual who reported the rumour on here lie about it?

[yoda]

Why would the individual who reported the rumour on here lie about it?

who cares?

[nicko]

the same Alan Nixon who was caught with his pants down over the Freidel saga and a dingle to boot!

leave it out John!

Come again?

[Iceman]

This whole takeover of Rovers will not happen anytime soon. There are too many little obstacles in the way, either its the valuation being off the mark, or the buyer is not capable of reaching an agreement. We do need investment, but who is worthy of running BRFC right now, without looking to make a profit.

[Guest Vinjay606]

Whatever your personal opinion it's by far the number 1 priority this summer.

Whoever comes in might appear out of nowhere so can't really answer the "worthy" question. Doubt Chelsea fans knew who Abramovich was before he appeared.

[philipl]

Let's just bring some sanity back into this thread.

1. Jack set a number of standards in the settlement for the management and ownership of BRFC.

2. These standards effectively rule out the Trust exiting completely to any organisation without at least £100m available for commitment to the Rovers

3. As I understand it, selling price pales into relative insignificance against the other requirements- basically Jack envisaged Rovers only leaving the Walker Trust to pass to another Jack

4. Only nine years ago, the vast riches which flow from PL membership were unenvisaged even by someone as wealthy and visionary as Jack. Unfortunately, the PL clubs outside of the top four have made a complete mess of running their businesses to the extent that greater wealth is destroying both the quality of football and paradoxically the business model that would have made sense. This is the issue the Trust is grappling with.

[Iceman]

Whatever your personal opinion it's by far the number 1 priority this summer.

Whoever comes in might appear out of nowhere so can't really answer the "worthy" question. Doubt Chelsea fans knew who Abramovich was before he appeared.

Its not as simple as you think it is Vinjay. The club doesnt want to find themselves in the position that Newcastle find themselves with Ashley, or Pompey with Gaydamak(sp) or whoever is in charge of them now. New ownership of a club our size, need to be handled carefully or else we will be a toy for somebody. Your obsession with a take over is too much now, get out, go watch a movie, find a girlfriend but stop playing with your keyboard and try to give the takeover thread a bit of air to breath

[Taggart]

the same Alan Nixon who was caught with his pants down over the Freidel saga and a dingle to boot!

leave it out John!

Come again?

Pants down , come again ? come on guys this is a football posting message board, not some way to proposition fellow posters :-)

[Stuart]

Let's just bring some sanity back into this thread.

1. Jack set a number of standards in the settlement for the management and ownership of BRFC.

2. These standards effectively rule out the Trust exiting completely to any organisation without at least £100m available for commitment to the Rovers

3. As I understand it, selling price pales into relative insignificance against the other requirements- basically Jack envisaged Rovers only leaving the Walker Trust to pass to another Jack

4. Only nine years ago, the vast riches which flow from PL membership were unenvisaged even by someone as wealthy and visionary as Jack. Unfortunately, the PL clubs outside of the top four have made a complete mess of running their businesses to the extent that greater wealth is destroying both the quality of football and paradoxically the business model that would have made sense. This is the issue the Trust is grappling with.

Surely there must be some kind of time bounding to these standards. If not, it could effectively have the opposite effect to what Jack intended. That is if no buyer is out there, how long will the trust be allowed to not invest in the club? The longer this continues the more likely relegation becomes.

[thenodrog]

Mine also comes up in bold. I probably shouldn't have him on ignore being a moderator..... but I'll make an exception for him.

I wish you bloody lot would put me on ignore!!!!

It's all very well having a person on ignore but is it possible a "fix" can be devised, whereby when another poster quotes them, then you can't read that either?

Don't be so precious. Do you really need an ignore facility to not read someone's post?

err btw can you see this Don?

[thenodrog]

One of the individuals previously interested in a BRFC purchase "sued" over gambling debt. This is about 3 months old but wasn't mentioned on here as I recall.

http://www.crainsmanchesterbusiness.co.uk/...gambling-losses

What a bloody numpty! Spews 160 grand and then blames the casino!!! Somebody as plumb stupid as that is just what we want eh? Coutts cheque indeed.

[T4E]

Come again?

Some posters seem to have interpreted the namecheck you got in Brad's book to mean that you were instrumental in the flogging of our best ever goalkeeper.

The same posters who are continually telling Vinjay to be more realistic on this very thread.

[Guest Vinjay606]

Talking of realistic where do people keep getting these stories about the takeover terms and conditions (i.e at least 100 million guarantee) Back it up with some proof.

I wouldn't be surprised if Ewood and Brockhall are protected. Dan Williams however probably didn't have a 100 million guarantee even with his consortium backers. Personally I think the truth is a lot more simple and comes down to how much the Walkers want. Just as straightforward as that once someone meets their asking price.

[dave birch]

Talking of realistic where do people keep getting these stories about the takeover terms and conditions (i.e at least 100 million guarantee) Back it up with some proof.

I wouldn't be surprised if Ewood and Brockhall are protected. Dan Williams however probably didn't have a 100 million guarantee even with his consortium backers. Personally I think the truth is a lot more simple and comes down to how much the Walkers want. Just as straightforward as that once someone meets their asking price.

Vinjay, what the asking price is, is like asking "how long is a piece of string". It's down to what the current owners want, and how long they can hang out before they get that price. Seeing the decline in property prices in the UK, that may well push the selling date out by years.

Additionally, there are quite likely other caveats that Jack put into the trust deed; ones that potential purchasors have been put off by.

[Guest Vinjay606]

If Jack put in conditions basically making a sale near impossible then why bother putting the club up for sale?

Of course what the Walkers want can change as they quoted seperate prices for the last 2 interested buyers.

[philipl]

Vinjay, you are completely incorrect in both your reading of my post and in your assumption about what would be involved in selling the Rovers.

[Guest Vinjay606]

Back up your claims about sale conditions with some proof.

[RevidgeBlue]

What a bloody numpty! Spews 160 grand and then blames the casino!!! Somebody as plumb stupid as that is just what we want eh? Coutts cheque indeed.

Absolutely unbelievable isn't it. What a s***!

Bet he wouldn't have given them the money back had he won!.

Nice work that if you can get it - have a free bet courtesy of the casino, if you win keep the money, if you lose pay nowt, and if you don't win, also sue them for extra damages for their "negligence" on top!

Choudray's Solicitors are just as bad, for taking the case they'll get their money win or lose.

Really hope the Courts throw that one out. The world and legal profession really has gone mad.

[dave birch]

Absolutely unbelievable isn't it. What a s***!

Bet he wouldn't have given them the money back had he won!.

Nice work that if you can get it - have a free bet courtesy of the casino, if you win keep the money, if you lose pay nowt, and if you don't win, also sue them for extra damages for their "negligence" on top!

Choudray's Solicitors are just as bad, for taking the case they'll get their money win or lose.

Really hope the Courts throw that one out. The world and legal profession really has gone mad.

The first question he should have asked himself is "Why don't I go home"

[Billy Castell]

What a tool. I suppose if he smoked 100 fags a day and got cancer he would sue every shop he bought them from, the fag companies etc. despite the pictures of diseased lungs on the packets. Honestly, do people not take responsibility over these sort of things any more?

[philipl]

Vinjay, start by reading the interview with the Trustees back in 2000 published in the Telegraph. Then read through the previous sale threads. Then come back here when you have done all that.

[RevidgeBlue]

Back to the main topic, I doubt there are any real conditions preventing or blocking a sale other than the actual asking price itself and any stipulations applying to Ewood Park/Brockhall.

If the Trust retain ownership of those, or if prospective purchasers take title but can't sell/put a charge against them, then they have little monetary value as "assets" and the asking price which has been rumoured in the press is going to look even more unrealistic than ever.

One thing's for certain, we can't carry on and survive at Premership level with continued nil investment in the team. The Trustees need to lower their sights on the asking price or better still support the manager until such time as they find a buyer at the sort of price they want.

Vinjay may obsess unheralthily about it, and there's not really a lot we can do, but basically he is right, it's probably the single most important issue concerning our long term future.

[Guest Vinjay606]

Would that particular interview contain these quotes?

"There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding that there is an ever shrinking pot of money that is available," said Mr Egerton-Vernon, who chairs the trust holding company which looks after the Walker businesses including Rovers.

"That is not the case. There are other businesses apart from the club which generate profits which are available.

"The fans need not be concerned in any way. The club is provided for for the foreseeable future. Jack was not a short term man."

http://archive.thisislancashire.co.uk/2000/8/19/717845.html

Nothing about sale conditions in the link.

[RevidgeBlue]

"The fans need not be concerned in any way. The club is provided for for the foreseeable future. Jack was not a short term man."[/b]

http://archive.thisislancashire.co.uk/2000/8/19/717845.html

Armed with the benefit of hindsight nine years on, the "forseeable future" only actually meant "until we can sell someone like Damien Duff for shedloads of money. After that you're on your own."

[Guest Vinjay606]

Reading through the LET archives it was Egerton-Vernon (maybe Williams has said something similar) who made a remark about selling a stake in the club to a Tv company. So if there's supposedly all sorts of terms and conditions about selling the entire club how would it apply to any group looking for a minimum stake?

Considering that recent rumour maybe there is some truth in the 10% thing. A sale might mean a maximum of 90% with the trust owning/protecting the Ewood and Brockhall properties. Seems like the only guarantee in terms of any stipulations attached to Ewood and Brockhall.