[Archived] Rovers Takeover: End game ?

[koi]

  On 29/10/2010 at 12:02, Bryan said:

aka "Fanta Pants"

I saw that one on google!

[dave birch]

  On 29/10/2010 at 12:00, Paul said:

OK so who else had to Google it? Quite like that one.

It's a good one isn't it Paul.

Even our Prime Minister calls herself a "Ranga".

Bryan, not so sure about that.

[John]

Action speak louder than words and all that, however I don’t think the initial comments from Venky’s has really helped them (£5 million transfer budget, doing it purely for their own brand etc).

All the initial comments did were draw amusement and ridicule from the media and non Rovers fans – best to say nothing at all sometimes.

As has been stated, it is the complete lack of understanding on football which bothers me – they will probably have to use advisers therefore more middle men will be involved in the running of our club which in turn will likely mean confusing communication lines.

Of course, at this stage, my post is speculative until further details emerge but nothing wrong with saying how you feel at this moment in time.

[broadsword]

Well, according to google, as koi says.

[brian_gallagher85]

  On 29/10/2010 at 11:53, dave birch said:

Modes, do you know what "Ranga" means?

It means a class in Irish...

[den]

I don't think there's a rovers fan around who doesn't contemplate the dangers of this takeover. How many of them contemplate the dangers of no takeover though? That could well see rovers head to the same destination via a different route. There is no safe haven for any football club.

[SamTheShrew]

  On 29/10/2010 at 12:58, den said:

I don't think there's a rovers fan around who doesn't contemplate the dangers of this takeover. How many of them contemplate the dangers of no takeover though? That could well see rovers head to the same destination via a different route. There is no safe haven for any football club.

We have to be taken over. Under the current regime, relegation, if not neccessarily this year, is a certainty

[BuckyRover]

In these last two days, the quality of players that we have been linked with has improved immeasurably.

This takeover will hopefully galvanise fans and players alike and give everyone hope for the future. Hope that things will get better rather than deteriorate.

To be fair, it's probably quite hard to motivate yourself knowing that you cannot be replaced due to a lack of money. I dont think that will be the case anymore.

[den]

I know STLR.

[SamTheShrew]

I'm sure that everyone is nervous whilst excited.

My question to those doubters is, what else is there to do other than head into the proverbial storm with a full sail?

[booth]

Regarding the article in the LT today, the trust have obviously made their minds up that Venky are the ones to takeover. Mr Syed seems to have been out of the running for a while now, and despite his efforts i don't think he will be reconsidered. As for Mr Shah, I don't think he has ever been a serious consideration.

I have a feeling that sometime next week it'll be a done deal (fit and proper test should be done by then I would have thought).

[broadsword]

  On 29/10/2010 at 13:01, SamTheLeedsRover said:

We have to be taken over. Under the current regime, relegation, if not neccessarily this year, is a certainty

I think Nicko said that if a takeover doesn't occur by the end of next month, then the Trust will look at alternative ways of funding the club. Now admittedly that isn't verbatim from the Trust, but you could imagine them taking that line. However, you'd have thought that they would have considered that strategy before despatching us to the tender mercies of a foreign conglomerate with zero connection to the club.

[Mandrake]

Of course the new owners want to make profit from the club...but they are not taking it FROM the club. It is the PR exposure for their firm which is their main financial benefit, not selling Keith Andrews and pocketing the change

[broadsword]

Good job, really, as they wouldn't get much change.

[den]

  On 29/10/2010 at 13:13, Bryan said:

I think Nicko said that if a takeover doesn't occur by the end of next month, then the Trust will look at alternative ways of funding the club. Now admittedly that isn't verbatim from the Trust, but you could imagine them taking that line. However, you'd have thought that they would have considered that strategy before despatching us to the tender mercies of a foreign conglomerate with zero connection to the club.

I think the trust either don't understand the dangers of non - funding [otherwise we wouldn't currently be joint 3rd from bottom], or they don't care Bryan.

[broadsword]

You may well be right there, Den. If so, I would suggest the latter is true.

What a sad attitude to have. I'm Jack Walker wouldn't have appreciated it. Makes me sad and angry.

[eire3382]

Quick question for thoes in the know (nicko, kamy etc.) Is it possible that the confusion over the comments from VH over the last few days is that they see us finishing around mid table this year (first interview) and then their hope is that the club will push on up the table (The interview the next day). This is my reading of it.

[SamTheShrew]

  On 29/10/2010 at 13:13, Bryan said:

I think Nicko said that if a takeover doesn't occur by the end of next month, then the Trust will look at alternative ways of funding the club. Now admittedly that isn't verbatim from the Trust, but you could imagine them taking that line. However, you'd have thought that they would have considered that strategy before despatching us to the tender mercies of a foreign conglomerate with zero connection to the club.

I appreciate that Bryan, but there is massive difference between funding a club just enough to avoid relegation, and then what the VH group are suggesting as their aims. All we can do is want the latter to succeed.

One is reactive, the other you would hope is pro-active

[broadsword]

  On 29/10/2010 at 13:47, SamTheLeedsRover said:

I appreciate that Bryan, but there is massive difference between funding a club just enough to avoid relegation, and then what the VH group are suggesting as their aims. All we can do is want the latter to succeed.

One is reactive, the other you would hope is pro-active

You're right, but I don't like change, I think that's my problem.

Whatever, it's not my call, I have no influence in it at all. But I reserve the right not to like how the club's being run - whoever the owners are. I hope I don't have to exercise it too much with Venky's.

[duffbear]

My biggest concern over this whole takover is where does this leave Keith Andrews?

[Sandiway Blue]

  On 29/10/2010 at 14:02, duffbear said:

My biggest concern over this whole takover is where does this leave Keith Andrews?

And thats a concern?

[unluckymorton]

  On 29/10/2010 at 14:02, duffbear said:

My biggest concern over this whole takover is where does this leave Keith Andrews?

Maybe he could be the new mascot, not just running round like a headless chicken but dressed as one too!

[American]

  On 28/10/2010 at 23:14, BPF said:

Is this achievable in a country where the average yearly wage is £313?

I think most of our fans exceed that amount in disposable income every month.

Was reading an article a while back about how there is a ton of disposable income in India crying out for big time sports events. IPL is an example already cited, and (if I remember correctly) they were also talking about how there have been several international football matches between middle to bottom tier African and Asian countries held there that have sold out.

[brian_gallagher85]

Not wishing to take this further off topic, but I think some fans should have a look at the stats when we have been with and without Keith this season.

[Uddersfelt Blue]

  On 29/10/2010 at 14:12, brian_gallagher85 said:

Not wishing to take this further off topic, but I think some fans should have a look at the stats when we have been with and without Keith this season.

Ouch!!!