[Archived] Rovers Might Have Been Sold?

[philipl]

Great point. The Trust knows enough about running a football club over the past 20 years that they have the experience and judgement to put people in place who can make the right judgements.

[Balwer]

Great point. The Trust knows enough about running a football club over the past 20 years that they have the experience and judgement to put people in place who can make the right judgements.

They appointed JW to do that, or rather Jack did.

Anyway it's clear no amount of reasoning will sway you from your opinion that The Trust is as good as it gets for us so hey, I'll move on.

[Balwer]

Ironically that's not always the case, though, is it? I'm not saying I don't want our club to have spending money, because in that sense it's a disadvantage for the club, but how many managers have appeared as failures due to money wastage? Hughes. Allardyce. Benitez. Grant. Keane. Ramos. And so on.

Money for the manager, in most cases, ends up being a bad thing for them I would say.

It's hard to argue that a club is worse off talent-wise when more money is spent, it's just that the expectations go up every time the spending does.

You didn't mention Ferguson, Guardiola, Mourinho, Wenger, Redknapp or Moyes. They spend a ton more than us, that's why they're always above us.

[den]

I'm not sure what this has to do with our current situation but, if anything, it proves that money alone does not buy your Premier League status. Not sure where you're going with that one, den.

Because you said that the trust will not see us relegated. We were relegated under Jack Walker, so why wont we get relegated under the trust? that's what I'm saying.

It's not as safe a haven as some people say.

[ABBEY]

Er is the northern premier league still going. Because without proper investment in players, that is where Rovers could end up.

id still go to ewood ,HOW MANY ON HERE WOULD? HONESTLY!!!

[Balwer]

My point is that the Trust would come up with emergency cash for the club if needed. That is almost a fact yet not many seem to acknowledge it - some even saying that the Trust are "trousering" the money. Personally I think they're just being astute businessmen with the correct people in place that gives us a very stable club model - and it works for the purpose of keeping as safe as you possibly can with minimal outlay when it's not really needed.

If everyone else was maintaining the status quo then I would agree with you, but they're not, the spending is getting bigger and bigger and it only takes a couple of poor decisions (ie. Ince) to put us in a precarious position. By removing the investment you remove the safety net.

[ABBEY]

Liverpool will sell a player for £25 million [Mascherano] and replace him with another similar type for £4.5 million [Poulsen]...the profit pays some bills.

That is one big difference at Rovers this summer. You have had nobody to sell to cover for the fact that you do not have benefactors who put their hands in their pockets.

ANDREWS IS WORTH 25M OF anyones money!!!!!!

[den]

My point is that the Trust would come up with emergency cash for the club if needed. That is almost a fact yet not many seem to acknowledge it

If I thought the trustees were prepared to say, put back the £3m/year and most importantly wanted to continue in control, they would get my full backing ET. Believing that they would bale us out in an emergency - and that gives us some kind of guarantee of PL safety, doesn't inspire me. We can't live like that for too long.

[Balwer]

They can get away with pumping in virtually no money yet protecting the clubs sale-able (Premier League) status.

That's the collective point though. Just because they have gotten away with it in the past is no indication that they will continue to do so in the future, particularly with the level of spending that other clubs indulge in, on the assumption that extra spending won't make your team worse talent-wise.

[den]

They can get away with pumping in virtually no money yet protecting the clubs sale-able (Premier League) status.

I think you'll be on your own there ET.

Anyway, I guess you feel like you're being ganged up on ET , which isn't nice.

So I'll let it rest for now.

[Fife Rover]

We have an increasing number of followers who exhibit the spoilt attitudes of cry babies.

If Jack Walker had said circa 1990 that he was going to put enough money into the then lowly and perrenially skint BRFC to rebuild the ground and the team into a proper Premier league outfit with a state of the art training facility and winning a few major trophies on the way as well as enjoying the occasionall foray into europe, but that after 20 years the club had to stand on it's own feet financially we'd all have snatched his bloody hand off.

People whinge about the trust but imo if Jack were alive today he'd have drawn the purse strings together too. Whatever he might have been he was certainly no fool intent on financial suicide.

Absolutely spot on Theno (the whole post).

There really are some people on here that live in cloud cuckoo land. It would be easy to lapse into the "trendy way" and call them all the different varieties of fools known to man, as is the "norm " these days, but I will not allow myself to sink to that level. However what I woud like to put to these people that expect some sort of fairy godmother to wet nurse BRFC through every minute of every season and come up with the finance to pull them out of every unwanted situation is that they are quite simply deluded. All they need to do is ask themselves if they would do that (assuming they had the finances to do it) and for how long would their benevolence continue?

There is nothing easier to do than spend someone elses hard earned eh?

[Balwer]

Absolutely spot on Theno (the whole post).

There really are some people on here that live in cloud cuckoo land. It would be easy to lapse into the "trendy way" and call them all the diferent varieties of fools known to man, as is the "norm " these days, but I will not allow myself to sink to that level. However what I woud like to put to these people that expect some sort of fairy godmother to wet nurse BRFC through every minute of every season and come up with the finance to pull them out of every unwanted situation are quite simply deluded. All they need to do is ask themselves if they would do that (assuming they had the finances to do it) and for how long would their benevolence continue?

There is nothing easier to do than spend someone elses hard earned eh?

Justifying the investment in a football club is not the same as debating whether or not it would be a better to have a new owner as opposed to the Trust. Go back through the posts and find someone who has said that buying Rovers would be a smart move. Nobody is saying that the Trust are wrong to not spend the money either, just that they aren't and that for some that's not the ideal ownership structure, while for others it is.

On a different note the Leicester City purchase seems to have gone through.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/leicester_city/8908211.stm

[philipl]

Justifying the investment in a football club is not the same as debating whether or not it would be a better to have a new owner as opposed to the Trust. Go back through the posts and find someone who has said that buying Rovers would be a smart move. Nobody is saying that the Trust are wrong to not spend the money either, just that they aren't and that for some that's not the ideal ownership structure, while for others it is the best we can hope for being realistic and thank goodness none of the clowns who came sniffing around prior to the current interest did not get their hands on us.

On a different note the Leicester City purchase seems to have gone through.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/leicester_city/8908211.stm

If you are quoting others, do so accurately- change in bold.

The Leicester negotiations have been as much as 12 months in the offing.

[Balwer]

If you are quoting others, do so accurately- change in bold.

The Leicester negotiations have been as much as 12 months in the offing.

If I was quoting someone I'd be sure to do so properly, thanks. I was merely making my assessment as to what the argument was, that some prefer the current ownership to remain in place while others would like to see new ownership. I made it as plain and non-provocative as possible and you still had to throw your 2 cents in.

Regarding the Leicester thing I was merely mentioning that it went through, no underlying comments regarding how long it took or comparing it to Rovers situation, which your reply implies.

For future reference not every post I make is directed to you, nor is every comment that doesn't agree with your own opinion a personal slight against you.

[Steve Moss]

Yes - for a safe future in the Premier League. But not an ambitious future. Although I guess measuring ambition is like measuring a piece of string. Maybe we should be grateful that a club and town of our size is sitting more comfortably than some in the Premier League.

Wisdom.

It is strange that Liverpool are mega millions in debt, yet are trying to buy players. rovers a mere 20 mill in debt and cannot buy players. How does that work?

I believe that they generate far more revenue than we do from more varied sources, so they can bear the debt that we cannot. Though it looks as if Liverpool took on too much debt and the bank will have to balance its books.

I think Liverpool is in trouble. They financial plan required them to compete in the Champions League. They aren't and so are in a world of hurt. They danger is that they get in even deeper, incurring more debt chasing a return to the CL, which may or may not materialize.

To repeat--all you can come up with is that the club must stay in the hands of people who don't want it! That is plain dumb.

To be fair to Philip, he has not said that the Rovers must stay with the Walker Trust. He has said that the Walkers Trust is a rare bred, an owner who does not load up a club with debt and who make no financial demands on it, but who will step up if our PL survivial requires it. Philip's position, which I agree with, is that we are on a seaworthy vessel and should not jump ship until we know for a certainty that we will improve on the quality of owners that we have now. Considering the Walkers are top drawer, that means 99% of potential buyers won't succeed. Which is a very good thing.

I am saying that the failures of the other clubs you mention has been due to the manager, not due to the owners. All the owner does is open the purse strings, the manager then decides what to do with it. If the owner gives you no money then you are put at a distinct disadvantage. If our ownership doesn't give our manager the opportunity to do so then how are they better than most other clubs? If the other clubs fail then they just end back at the spot we are currently in now, selling our best players to balance the books.

You talk about four top half finishes like that's somehow entirely the Trust's doing. It isn't. It's Souey's, Sparky's and Big Sam's.

Sam and JW deserve credit for their achievements. But don't sell our owners short. They are sharp businessmen who have been good to the club. They don't burden the club and they have taught our chairman and managers that every penny is to be pinched till it bleeds. They don't throw money at problems, they clip coupons and look for the bargains.

And I, for one, am proud of the Rovers achievement on a limited budget. I wonder how the Rovers did last season on a point per pound basis and how that compares with the other PL clubs?

Because you said that the trust will not see us relegated. We were relegated under Jack Walker, so why wont we get relegated under the trust? that's what I'm saying.

We were relegated under Jack. And he invested enough to bring us right back up, even though he did not live to see it.

No one care guarantee that a club won't be relegated. From the Trustee's behavior under Ince, I suspect that they acted to avoid a repeat as they would have had to do the exact same thing. Invest to bring us back up. Which is a great (and rare) safety net.

The difference between Jack and the Trust, is that Jack could deviate from his plan at any given moment, as it was his money. The Trust does not have that same latitude as it must comply with any instructions Jack left.

[nicko]

The Leicester negotiations have been as much as 12 months in the offing.

No, about three months.

The same group - or their chums - were looking at Rovers at roughly the same time.

No idea why they picked Leicester over Rovers.

[Exiled in Toronto]

If the Trust are the best owners, but they want to sell, then that would be to someone who is less ideal than they are. Therefore the Trust are not ideal owners because they wish us to have worse owners.

Or, they believe there ARE potential owners out there who are at least as good, which Philipl says is not the case. Therefore, if Philipl is right, the Trust are deluded, which makes them not ideal owners, which contradicts what Philipl claims about them being ideal owners, thus making him wrong.

[Claytons Left Boot]

If the Trust are the best owners, but they want to sell, then that would be to someone who is less ideal than they are. Therefore the Trust are not ideal owners because they wish us to have worse owners.

Or, they believe there ARE potential owners out there who are at least as good, which Philipl says is not the case. Therefore, if Philipl is right, the Trust are deluded, which makes them not ideal owners, which contradicts what Philipl claims about them being ideal owners, thus making him wrong.

[dj54nna]

No idea why they picked Leicester over Rovers.

City based clubs, decent attendances and fans who are willing to pay good money to see their team, I would guess. To a flash 'arry with a lot of money, making the biggest noise they can in front of as many people as possible, they assume this will hopefully get them the biggest return.

Derby, Man City, Stoke, Sunderland.

As we well know, throwing money at city clubs doesn't always seem to work. And eventually money has to be taken away in the form of debts (Liverpool).

People from cities see teams like Rovers and Wigan as annoyances, taking up 'their' Premier League places, just because we're at a socio-economic and geographic disadvatange. No respect for history or good management because we don't sell as many shirts.

[Bobby G]

Just to make it clear about the Thais.

It was never about Leicester OR Rovers. Leicester was happening anyway. It was a question of adding Rovers or not.

[unclejack28]

I thought you could only buy one club?

[nicko]

I thought you could only buy one club?

Unless a friend does...get a feeling you did well to miss out on this mob.

[47er]

My point is that the Trust would come up with emergency cash for the club if needed. That is almost a fact yet not many seem to acknowledge it

You can't have almost a fact! Its either a fact or an opinion. And living like that, wondering whether or when the Trust will make the judgement that we are going down and its time to spend a bit is very scary.

[47er]

I know... Still, I just wanted to say it.

I'm fairly defensive about the Trust and the running of the club. My gripe is with people who have a go at the Trust. I wonder how much they've has lost out of running the Rovers since Jack died? Nobody seems to stand back, look at what we've achieved over the last decade and take stock properly. Nobody seems to be realistic around here at the moment.

Edit: You only have to look at posters in the Summer transfer topic calling for the board's head, describing the entire management team as "clowns" and generally claiming that the club is doomed. It's like a virus.

I agree totally with hat you say in your last sentence but I do feel that without a takeover the club is doomed to relegation in the near to medium term. That's not the same as "doomed" of course.

It is unrealistic though for people to believe the club can never be sold and that our best prospect is to stay with the Trust who want out.

[Paul]

The thread certainly makes interesting reading; one thing which amazes me is how much can be ascertained from so few facts concerning the Trust's view of the club and the two potential bidding groups. I sit in the same group as Philip and believe the Trust is currently the best possible owner for the club, plus I find it difficult to imagine a better owner. I'm not going to criticise the potential bidders but will give my impression, one strikes me as a dodgy second-hand car salesman, the other a very wealthy individual who is looking to find something to do with both his time and money. I'm less than sure these are positive attributes for football club owners. I realise these are sweeping statements but they are the impression gained from the same information the rest of you have read.

While I applaud Kamy's efforts to obtain information I worry about organisations who allow staff to apparently twitter sensitive information or who have both on and off the record conversations with random football fans. I'm not criticising Kamy but I have no idea who he is, if I was e-mailed me asking for details of my company's business intentions the message would be ignored unless very strong reasons for the contact where provided for requesting the details.

Until recently I thought Villa were a club going places under Lerner. I've been at least twice since he took over and I felt the ground oozed PL progress, it really looked the part. MON is a smart manager, the team has been doing well etc. Yet even with all this Lerner apparently pulls the funding and MON walks out - ever noticed how all managers are actually spolit brats, take away the lollipop and they scream and flounce out the door. Whatever happened to doing the job with the tools you've been given rather than insisting on a new set every year? Having said this I was genuinely surprised to read of the Villa situation, for me it proves two views I have long held;

Overseas, or any type, of "investment" does not or cannot work for a football club

The game has completely ruined itself and the PL chairmen, since it's inception, have collectively made a total mess of club finances which ultimately will lead to the game'as collapse as we know it today

Those continuing to support the Trust and being critical of potential buy-outs are asked to come up with an alternative. I ask "why?" - the current setup works and while the football may be as dull as ditchwater from a manger totally lacking charisma and flair it works, provided one accepts PL survival is our goal. Anyone with an ounce of realism must appreciate this all Rovers can currently hope for. Whether this is good enough or not is a different discussion, I don't feel it is enough but believe the inherent risks involved in new owners is far greater than the risk very poor football presents to the club.

I'm not against new owners in principal but ask those who favour the takeover to provide one, just one will do, example of a PL club where financial "investment" has worked and improved the club. Rovers are discussing a business deal, an "investment" which by definition should provide a profit. Please don't include Abramovich or Sheik Man City as these are not serious business investments, these are people with so much money they can never spend it all so may as well through some at a hobby.

The Trust continues to represent the stability Jack Walker brought to the club. Older supporters will correct me but I think the Jack Walker / Trust era has provided the longest, continuous, and probably only, period of sustained financial stability in the club's history. Why do you wish to throw this all away in the pursuit of money? It is money - and let's not use all this "investment" clap trap, it's complete nonsense - which has destroyed the game in recent years. With a £50m+ turnover this business should not need investment unless it had serious plans to progress, and reluctant though I am to say it, there is no potential for growth regardless of how many billions of people live in India. Anyone creating a business plan based on such marketing is a very poor businessman and should be rejected by the Trust.

If we all want Rovers to progress and recognise the club needs "investment" my first suggestion is every fan starts to pay a proper price to watch PL football. Our household used to have to budget for the cost of STs and all the associated paraphenalia, these days it's not even thought about. The product has been utterly devalued, partly due to ST pricing. If you want better players, start sending the club the difference between waht you pay and the real cost of an ST.