[Archived] Rovers Might Have Been Sold?

[Hughesy]

I agree we dont need to see massive investment each year like City - and also another key would being in a position to say 'na stick your £15m for x player, we dont need it'.

Take our current team, add in Bentley, Bellamy & Ireland and you have a team more than capable of top 6.

[roversfan99]

Why do people always ask for our own players back when coming up with their wish-lists?

[Hughesy]

Why do people always ask for our own players back when coming up with their wish-lists?

Perhaps because we are aware of their ability if given the chance in the correct environment?

Bellamy was awesome last season....as was Ireland for the 1st half of the season.

Bentley has the ability as he showed at Ewood.

[tony gale's mic]

Absolutely true.

1. Lakshmi Mittal - QPR £18.4bn

2. Sheikh Mansour - Man City £17bn

3. Roman Abramovich - Chelsea £7.8bn

4. Ashan Ali Syed - *Blackburn* £7bn

5. Joe Lewis - Tottenham £2.5bn

6. The Glazers - Man Utd £1.5bn

That list is a bit misleading as that isn't Syed's personal wealth. Also Lakshmi Mittal may be richer than Sheikh Mansour but QPR arent seeing that much of that money.

[neekoy]

In the same light, it's also worth noting that the Trust aren't far off being on that list. I'm sure I read somewhere recently that all their assets were worth something like £900m. I could be wrong.

I know its Wiki but still a decent enough list

My link

[RevidgeBlue]

That list is a bit misleading as that isn't Syed's personal wealth. Also Lakshmi Mittal may be richer than Sheikh Mansour but QPR arent seeing that much of that money.

The Lancashire Telegraph claims it is.

Admittedly on reading the article I was a bit unclear as to whether Syed's personal wealth was seven billion and then in addition WGA had 8 billion worth of assets under management.

Or whether his "seven billion fortune" was calculated on the basis of him owning a 90% stake in WGA.

If it's the former it should be happy days. If it's the latter it's a huge difference and arguably he isn't worth that much at all.

[JAL]

The Lancashire Telegraph claims it is.

Admittedly on reading the article I was a bit unclear as to whether Syed's personal wealth was seven billion and then in addition WGA had 8 billion worth of assets under management.

Or whether his "seven billion fortune" was calculated on the basis of him owning a 90% stake in WGA.

If it's the former it should be happy days. If it's the latter it's a huge difference and arguably he isn't worth that much at all.

Why do they always quote assets when it should be about how much liquid cash ones got i.e. how much can they instantly pull out.

[tony gale's mic]

The Lancashire Telegraph claims it is.

Admittedly on reading the article I was a bit unclear as to whether Syed's personal wealth was seven billion and then in addition WGA had 8 billion worth of assets under management.

Or whether his "seven billion fortune" was calculated on the basis of him owning a 90% stake in WGA.

If it's the former it should be happy days. If it's the latter it's a huge difference and arguably he isn't worth that much at all.

It's almost certainly the latter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indians_by_net_worth

[1864roverite]

I think one thing is certain about this chap, he will not have muppetsw doing the work, he will have top quality legal people doing it, ultra professionals who command top dollar. They earn such figures because they do the job professionally.

There is no reason why these legal eagles cannot do the job faster than any normal takeover business,none whatsoever.

[Ewood and I Would]

Why do they always quote assets when it should be about how much liquid cash ones got i.e. how much can they instantly pull out.

In that case Roman Abramovich should top the list as his entire wealth is liquid.

[Guest Kamy100]

You also have to remember that he is the sole heir to a HUGE family fortune.

[tony gale's mic]

You also have to remember that he is the sole heir to a HUGE family fortune.

How big and which family? Surely if it was in the billions the family would be all over the internet?

To be honest if he invests £300m in the club long term, that's enough for me. And I think he has access to the funds, it's just his personal wealth doesn't strike me as being up there with the richest in the league like some people say.

[Plastic Head]

If this guy is such a big cricket fan maybe he will inject some loose change into East Lancs?

[Guest Kamy100]

I am not sure exactly how much but it is considerable, they have a 150 year history of investment and it is linked to the East India Company.

[Bobby G]

This gets more exciting by the minute.

Lets hope it does happen, and its as good as it sounds.

[imy9]

I think it matters what he is willing to invest rather than how much his worth, look at QPR, he has invested one billion in his company that to me smacks of someone with considerable wealth

[Bobby G]

I dont think anyone wants a Man City-esque spending spree cause we will sign players for 3 times their actual value.

I think we can quietly go about our business and improve steadily.

[Amo]

I dont think anyone wants a Man City-esque spending spree cause we will sign players for 3 times their actual value.

I think we can quietly go about our business and improve steadily.

Extra £4-5m per season + tighter wage bill + player sales = Good times.

[Hughesy]

£5m a season isnt enough to progress the squad when teams like Stoke can pay £8m for Jones.

Id hope he would come in & make £20m-£30m available in his first window...that would allow for 3-4 signings of very good quality, which would make a massive difference. Like I said yesterday a very good start would be something like Bentley, Bellamy & Ireland - they are just examples....not going to happen like that but that sort of quality would probably set us back little over £20m.

Kamy - Very interesting to hear about the HUGE family wealth

[Amo]

£5m a season isnt enough to progress the squad when teams like Stoke can pay £8m for Jones.

And will, in all likelihood, be no better than us for it?

[Ewood and I Would]

Extra £4-5m per season + tighter wage bill + player sales = Good times.

I'd be very disapointed if that's all we got from someone worth 7bn. Our budget is currently negative (think money in from Bentley, Santa Cruz and even McCarthy vs what we have spent) so and extra £5m each season (that's £2.5m per window) and we'd still be miles behind other clubs in the top 10.

We need to be able to buy a £10m player at least one a season and £4-5m players shouldn't be a "stretch" to us or blow our entire budget. Think about Ashley Young, he was bought for £9m from Watford by Villa (the type of signing we would now be able to make) but how much is he worth now? Diarra is another example..

You can spend £10m and still make a huge profit. From what Syed has said he wants to invet in youth and if we can buy the Youngs, Bales, Ramseys from their lower league clubs before the likes of Villa, Spurs and Arsenal we can still sell them on to the likes of Citeh for massive profit after a good few years of boosting Rovers up the table.

It's actually a very good tactic as although we won't be able to compete with bigger clubs for the very established players purely because we aren't "fashionable" enough (yet) but we have an advantage on young players as they see us as a better opporttunity to play (think Bentley leaving Arsenal for us, Peds turning down Man U), call it a "stepping stone" but if they help get us up the league and bring us goals on the way to their "dream move" to Man Utd then why should we complain?

There is a difference between not expecting City style spending and expecting a competitive transfer budget. Spending £25m in one window isn't unusual to some of the other teams that finish around us.

[tony gale's mic]

£5m a season isnt enough to progress the squad when teams like Stoke can pay £8m for Jones.

Id hope he would come in & make £20m-£30m available in his first window...that would allow for 3-4 signings of very good quality, which would make a massive difference. Like I said yesterday a very good start would be something like Bentley, Bellamy & Ireland - they are just examples....not going to happen like that but that sort of quality would probably set us back little over £20m.

Kamy - Very interesting to hear about the HUGE family wealth

But the whole point is that our model as a club, under Souness, Hughes and Sam, has been to get players on the cheap who have turned into huge assets; either as big club cast offs or little known signings from abroad.

There's no reason why that shouldnt stay as our model, especially as (very) early indications are that Mame Diouf may just be another example of this.

With the extra money though we should:

a) Try and go for £4-5m targets rather than the £1-2m targets we can afford now

and b ) Look to supplement our side with the occasional established player signing, but even then we should be expanding our scope a lot more than two former Rovers player and an established Premier League player.

I also don't think we should necessarily hang onto our players just because we have more money, selling has often worked well for us in the past.

For example as good as Phil Jones a player could well be, if he gets to be a big Premier League star and we get offered around £20m for him (like other top young defenders have been), the £20m could still be of more use to us.

[thenodrog]

£5m a season isnt enough to progress the squad when teams like Stoke can pay £8m for Jones.

Whats wrong with Stoke spending big? Their owner also owned Britains fastest growing business last year..... and quite significantly which we should all bear in mind imo ... HE IS A STOKE CITY FAN!!!

But the whole point is that our model as a club, under Souness, Hughes and Sam, has been to get players on the cheap who have turned into huge assets; either as big club cast offs or little known signings from abroad.

There's no reason why that shouldnt stay as our model,

Yes there is. Transfer fees are on their way out.

[Amo]

We've competed in this league against teams who have vastly outspent us, and yet suddenly we'll be needing a £10m player every season? Trust me, an extra £5m per year PLUS the money saved on wages and player sales would be a significant boost to our transfer kitty, and means we would've been able to sign our original targets like Lewandowski, without going nuts and signing players well above their valuation.

[daveoftherovers]

And how was the Stoke City Fan feeling with his £8m lying lifeless on the turf at Wolves yesterday?

Ouch!