[Archived] Rovers Takeover: End game ?

[thenodrog]

And still you do not understand that I was reflecting what I was hearing- there were numerous twists and turns.

When I stated my opinion, I clearly indicated it to be what I thought.

Outside of the Blackburn bubble, most people are looking at what is happening with astonishment- the sort of astonishment when you can see a car crash is about to happen to someone you know.

Think of being a passenger on a runaway train and the buffers coming up fast.

If this is such a transparently bad deal in your eyes, then the Trust must either be stupid or callous. Which do you think?

'stupid or callous'? Relieved would be a much more accurate description of their mood I'd imagine.

[47er]

I get your drift Balwer, sounds like I misinterpreted your post.

I read it that "People seem to forget the Trust will receive 30m pounds for their troubles after the debts are cleared ..." as "So why should the Trust care about selling us down the river, look at how much cash they're getting". To which I was just pointing out that as an investment they are in reality bequeathing circa 70M+ of Jack's money to the club (100M'ish - 30M). Which isn't too shoddy. I believe Syed made an improved bid that would have given them more cash, so I don't think it is a prime motivator for them to be fair. Maybe that's the 'Trust the Tust' bit.

An aside on the "... Syed and Shah never actually fronted the money by all accounts" bit. I have it on very good authoity that whilst this may be true of the Shah approach it is definitely inaccurate when it comes to the Syed bid. I think any 'concerns' may have been more to do with the possible future of his other 'open' positions, not whether he had the cash to show today. Again maybe another nod towards 'Trust the Tust'.

On the 'Debt' and Trust covenants discussion raised by others, I would say there is a distinction here without a difference. If the Trust said 'absolutely no Debt on the club's balance sheet to fund this deal' then that could be met by the VH folk going to their bankers and borrowing money in their own right but secured against the shares in the now fully owned BRFC. The debt is against them and not the club. That's the 'distinction' bit. The 'no difference' bit is what would happen if the VH group defaulted on their debts. The bank would seek to regain it's funds by turning to the shares held as security/collateralisation. In other words they would either make a forced sale to the highest bidder or break up the company to claw as much cash back as possible. As far as we are concerned there's no difference in the outcome of these two scenarios, it's all bad. Not that I am saying in any way that this is what is happening behind the scenes, just that it's a trivial exercise for any financial engineer who wanted to arrange this.

I think that this is what Philip was alluding to. The Trust can only legislate for the first scenario, what Venky's choose to do with their share holding cannot be controlled or influenced by anyone. Therefore in theory Philip makes a very valid point. Sorry.

To be fair Philip had loads of opportunity (months in fact) to make this distinction and never did. In fact he invariably ignored the questions and just persisted in the allegation.

[Hughesy]

The Venkys are selling assets in order to buy us, or

They are borrowing the funds

If they are borrowing, is Rovers the collateral?

Can you borrow on something that isnt yours?

Also why is it one of those two things? Surely a £46m bank transfer to several sources (banks, trust etc) isnt something that happens in a matter of minutes? Surely the bank have to ok everything, and verify all the account details etc?

[koi]

Can you borrow on something that isnt yours?

Also why is it one of those two things? Surely a £46m bank transfer to several sources (banks, trust etc) isnt something that happens in a matter of minutes? Surely the bank have to ok everything, and verify all the account details etc?

What do you think a mortgage is?

[Mattyblue]

Leave the financials to philipl, hughesy... Oh wait.

[Hughesy]

What do you think a mortgage is?

Ok let me put it another way....can you borrow against something you do not own the deeds too? I.e could I borrow cash against your house?!

[philipl]

You can borrow against something you are going to own- that's otherwise known as a mortgage on a new house.

Timmyjimmy has explained it exactly.

[47er]

You can borrow against something you are going to own- that's otherwise known as a mortgage on a new house.

Timmyjimmy has explained it exactly.

Whatever the theory the family have said they are buying the club with their own resources. Could be as simple as the bank having been instructed to release their funds once the legal people tell them everything re the deal is tied up.

So when one of the brothers refers to the "bank releasing the funds" (not exact quote) that's what he means.

The problems come when people interpret everything at the most negative because they have a desire to discredit the bid.

[fozzer]

No you can't take a loan out on a ltd company you are about to buy! But you can then take the money out of the business after you buy it. A mortgage is secured against a property not a ltd company!

[Hughesy]

Surely the trust will have made it legal tight that they cant borrow against us in the future...im confident that will be one of the restrictions on our sale....

There must be some rules/ restrictions in that trust or I honestly believe it would have been sold long ago otherwise.

[47er]

I get your drift Balwer, sounds like I misinterpreted your post.

I read it that "People seem to forget the Trust will receive 30m pounds for their troubles after the debts are cleared ..." as "So why should the Trust care about selling us down the river, look at how much cash they're getting". To which I was just pointing out that as an investment they are in reality bequeathing circa 70M+ of Jack's money to the club (100M'ish - 30M). Which isn't too shoddy. I believe Syed made an improved bid that would have given them more cash, so I don't think it is a prime motivator for them to be fair. Maybe that's the 'Trust the Tust' bit.

An aside on the "... Syed and Shah never actually fronted the money by all accounts" bit. I have it on very good authoity that whilst this may be true of the Shah approach it is definitely inaccurate when it comes to the Syed bid. I think any 'concerns' may have been more to do with the possible future of his other 'open' positions, not whether he had the cash to show today. Again maybe another nod towards 'Trust the Tust'.

On the 'Debt' and Trust covenants discussion raised by others, I would say there is a distinction here without a difference. If the Trust said 'absolutely no Debt on the club's balance sheet to fund this deal' then that could be met by the VH folk going to their bankers and borrowing money in their own right but secured against the shares in the now fully owned BRFC. The debt is against them and not the club. That's the 'distinction' bit. The 'no difference' bit is what would happen if the VH group defaulted on their debts. The bank would seek to regain it's funds by turning to the shares held as security/collateralisation. In other words they would either make a forced sale to the highest bidder or break up the company to claw as much cash back as possible. As far as we are concerned there's no difference in the outcome of these two scenarios, it's all bad. Not that I am saying in any way that this is what is happening behind the scenes, just that it's a trivial exercise for any financial engineer who wanted to arrange this.

I think that this is what Philip was alluding to. The Trust can only legislate for the first scenario, what Venky's choose to do with their share holding cannot be controlled or influenced by anyone. Therefore in theory Philip makes a very valid point. Sorry.

So basically, when Philip told us how grateful he was that the Trust rules precluded a leveraged sale, it doesn't matter whether he made it up or not because the buyer could easily get arund the restriction anyway!!

[deryck guyler's spoon]

I think a lot of the less vocal and non-posters would rather have philipl's input on the board than not. Too many threads getting ruined here due to one-upmanship.

Glenn... convert this board to mono, quick!

Phillip has made a rod for his own back. I think it's naive not to expect people to react.

[BlueMonday]

So basically, when Philip told us how grateful he was that the Trust rules precluded a leveraged sale, it doesn't matter whether he made it up or not because the buyer could easily get arund the restriction anyway!!

Which is basically what happend to Liverpool. There was an agreement between Moores and Hicks/Gillet not to transfer the debt of the purchase onto the club. However once they were in control they just did it anyway. As well as not building the promised new stadium.

If it can happen to Liverpool, and ManU, it could certainly happen to us.

[LWX]

Just read the Venky's company profile... all in on medical products, processed food and massive multi-nationals > they sound like a right bunch of crooked buggerz, not exactly sure how I feel about all this!

[bluebruce]

Just read the Venky's company profile... all in on medical products, processed food and massive multi-nationals > they sound like a right bunch of crooked buggerz, not exactly sure how I feel about all this!

Why is that so crooked?

[deryck guyler's spoon]

Just read the Venky's company profile... all in on medical products, processed food and massive multi-nationals > they sound like a right bunch of crooked buggerz, not exactly sure how I feel about all this!

*sigh*

Jesus Christ

[Mattyblue]

Know where elaxo is coming from, that Bernard Matthews has always seemed a bit shifty.

[gumboots]

Which is basically what happend to Liverpool. There was an agreement between Moores and Hicks/Gillet not to transfer the debt of the purchase onto the club. However once they were in control they just did it anyway. As well as not building the promised new stadium.

If it can happen to Liverpool, and ManU, it could certainly happen to us.

Anything could happen to us. Just as when I get up in the morning to go to work, anything could happen to me. However, if I spent too long worrying about it, I'd never go anywhere, so I take reasonable precautions, like putting on my seatbelt when I get in the car and making sure my umbrella is to handand off I go, trusting that those whose job it is have got things like traffic lights working to protect me on my way. Now it doesn't always work. Accidents and unforeseen circumstances sometimes mean that people get hurt and things go wrong, but there's a lot of fun to be had out there too. I think we have to assume that the Trust are taking reasonable precautions over this sale, and let them get on with it. There will always be concerns in our minds, just as whan I venture onto the M6 and especialy if I have to pull out into the next lane, there's always that moment when I worry I've missed someone in the blind spot, but generally nothing disastrous happens and i get where I'm going safely.

[BPF]

I'm now more open to the idea than a takeover by VH than I was previously. However, the people who are defending VH no matter what happens need their heads looking. To be 100% for them at this stage is just as mad as being 100% against them. Noone knows enough yet to make an informed decision either way. The only emotion you should be feeling right now is cautious with a hint of optimism. Anything else, is dangerous and entirely unfounded.

Maybe it would be unwise to mention that with the exception of Hughesy, the people pushing for the takeover regardless of circumstance, are not the people that will be passing through the turnstiles this afternoon....

[chaddyrovers]

I'm now more open to the idea than a takeover by VH than I was previously. However, the people who are defending VH no matter what happens need their heads looking. To be 100% for them at this stage is just as mad as being 100% against them. Noone knows enough yet to make an informed decision either way. The only emotion you should be feeling right now is cautious with a hint of optimism. Anything else, is dangerous and entirely unfounded.

Maybe it would be unwise to mention that with the exception of Hughesy, the people pushing for the takeover regardless of circumstance, are not the people that will be passing through the turnstiles this afternoon....

good post. Myself is positive with alot of caution till we know about the new owners and their plans for the club short and long term. And yes I will be at Rovers today and I am a season ticket holder who goes to some away games aswell.

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

I'm now more open to the idea than a takeover by VH than I was previously. However, the people who are defending VH no matter what happens need their heads looking. To be 100% for them at this stage is just as mad as being 100% against them. Noone knows enough yet to make an informed decision either way. The only emotion you should be feeling right now is cautious with a hint of optimism. Anything else, is dangerous and entirely unfounded.

Maybe it would be unwise to mention that with the exception of Hughesy, the people pushing for the takeover regardless of circumstance, are not the people that will be passing through the turnstiles this afternoon....

Nobody is 100% for this bid. I dont think anyone has ever posted that they'd sell no matter what to any company. I think the majority of this board are cautiously optimistic regarding the takeover. It needs to happen and now it is happening. The buyers seem to be on a relatively decent financial level and are being realistic in their aims for the club. The trust have batted away several candidates, one of which seems to have had more money, which therefore shows that the Trust are looking for the best home for the club and not just where the money is.

I think it is natural and healthy to have doubts and any change obviously involves a calculated risk. If people choose to be sceptical and fearful then fine, but as the concerns which have been brought up over the past week or so do not have any real substance to them, Iam choosing to remain hopeful that VH will bring a better future for Rovers then the Trust or Syed/Shah could have given us.

[fishmesiter]

I've read through all the last three (or four?) incarnations of this thread without posting. I very rarely post as you can see.

However, as the end seems to be in sight, I think it's time that I put my own feelings out.

It has become very clear over the last three/four years that the trust have become bored and or incapable of supporting the club in the way it needs to to maintain our current position. This has been made clear through their reduction in funding and the withdrawl of the £3m per season they were putting in. The fact that the team has needed investment in playing staff to challenge for a European place - which has been in reach, but we have been unable to provide this despite selling our better players - roque, bentley, warnock etc for huge profits proves that the club needed a change in direction to maintain the staus quo.

I hope that the board/trust still have the best interests of the club at heart. I see no reason for this to have changed. If they had wanted to just get out, there appears to be many parties out there that would be interested in aquiring a PL club. However, they have employed rothschilds and charged them with finding a buyer that satisfies their requirments in terms of securing the future of our club. I believe that John Williams loves this club. If he did not feel that this deal was best for the future of the club, then I am quite sure that rumblings of discontent would be much louder than they are.

Therefore I can only conclude that the management believe that this deal is the best for the club. This may prove to be incorrect but nobody has a crystal ball. We must put our trust in the people that have managed to keep this small town club at the pinnacle of it's sport for the last decade. I know that if I had put so much effort into ensuring a project of mine had been successful for this period of time, I would very careful who I handed over the reigns to. I wouldn't want my time and effort,let alone cash, to be wasted at the drop of a hat.

[Pete1981]

It looks like the new owners will be at the game again today with what the chauffeur guy has written on twitter

is off to Ewood again later with a couple guys from London

[koi]

I've read through all the last three (or four?) incarnations of this thread without posting. I very rarely post as you can see.

However, as the end seems to be in sight, I think it's time that I put my own feelings out.

It has become very clear over the last three/four years that the trust have become bored and or incapable of supporting the club in the way it needs to to maintain our current position. This has been made clear through their reduction in funding and the withdrawl of the £3m per season they were putting in. The fact that the team has needed investment in playing staff to challenge for a European place - which has been in reach, but we have been unable to provide this despite selling our better players - roque, bentley, warnock etc for huge profits proves that the club needed a change in direction to maintain the staus quo.

I hope that the board/trust still have the best interests of the club at heart. I see no reason for this to have changed. If they had wanted to just get out, there appears to be many parties out there that would be interested in aquiring a PL club. However, they have employed rothschilds and charged them with finding a buyer that satisfies their requirments in terms of securing the future of our club. I believe that John Williams loves this club. If he did not feel that this deal was best for the future of the club, then I am quite sure that rumblings of discontent would be much louder than they are.

Therefore I can only conclude that the management believe that this deal is the best for the club. This may prove to be incorrect but nobody has a crystal ball. We must put our trust in the people that have managed to keep this small town club at the pinnacle of it's sport for the last decade. I know that if I had put so much effort into ensuring a project of mine had been successful for this period of time, I would very careful who I handed over the reigns to. I wouldn't want my time and effort,let alone cash, to be wasted at the drop of a hat.

You've echoed mine and probably most who read this board thoughts. The fact is the trust has put in the best part of £100m and the stakes get higher every year. I've no doubt the trust could have sold before now but for whatever reason they haven't. I've said numerous times in the past the only thing we can do is trust the trust. Let's just hope the new owners are in it for the right reasons.

[47er]

Which is basically what happend to Liverpool. There was an agreement between Moores and Hicks/Gillet not to transfer the debt of the purchase onto the club. However once they were in control they just did it anyway. As well as not building the promised new stadium.

If it can happen to Liverpool, and ManU, it could certainly happen to us.

So what's to be grateful about?