Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS, SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

[Archived] Ali Syed in trouble in Spain

Hughesy

Recommended Posts

Hughesy World Cup

Hughesy

Posted
Posted

Racing Santander owner Ahsan Ali Syed defaulted on the repayment of part of the Spanish soccer team’s debt to the regional government, which has the right to cancel his acquisition as early as next month

See more

£100m man

So remains to be seen - have we dodged a bullet, did we get our own bullet? Or did we get ambitious new owners....the summer transfer windown will tell us all we need to know.

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply
LeChuck World Cup

LeChuck

Posted
Posted

We definitely got the better owners of the two, Syed has too many dodgy stories surrounding him for them all to be untrue.

That doesn't mean we have good owners though. at the moment it feels like we had a choice of being kicked in the left or right bollock .

Stuart World Cup

Stuart

Posted
Posted

Good way of describing it LeChuck! :lol:

I guess time will tell. Quite soon I think too!

Gav

Gav

Posted
Posted

Racing Santander owner Ahsan Ali Syed defaulted on the repayment of part of the Spanish soccer team’s debt to the regional government, which has the right to cancel his acquisition as early as next month

See more

£100m man

So remains to be seen - have we dodged a bullet, did we get our own bullet? Or did we get ambitious new owners....the summer transfer windown will tell us all we need to know.

I think this story only goes to show that Venkys passed the criteria set out in the sale and Ahsan Ali Syed clearly didn't.

Should give us some cause for optimism surely, then again that depends if you’re a glass half full or glass half empty type of lad or lass.

  • 5 weeks later...
Mattyblue World Cup

Mattyblue

Posted
Posted

'Ali Syed said supporters’s expectations were too high.

“I have never promised to invest exorbitant amounts in the club: don’t expect me to invest heavily or aggressively because I cannot,” Ali Syed said. “I cannot build Rome in one day.” '

Changed his tune...

Gav

Gav

Posted
Posted

Escaped what? He has £100m in a bank account….iv seen it! :P

Who said that :rock: ?

Hughesy World Cup

Hughesy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

“I have never promised to invest exorbitant amounts in the club: don’t expect me to invest heavily or aggressively because I cannot,” Ali Syed said. “I cannot build Rome in one day.” '

Changed his tune...

Yep - strange that one...at Rovers he was going to pump mega money in - yet for some reason never passed the trusts test - strange!

RevidgeBlue World Cup

RevidgeBlue

Posted
Posted

It seems this bloke doesn't have anything like the resources he said he had and is starting to be be found out.

Presumably the Trustees/Rothschilds sussed this out some time ago and canned him.

You don't turn down someone offering you 300m over 15 years if they actually have it to give unless you're clinically insane. Regardless of whether they leave their flat in a mess or not. :rolleyes:

To think the LT happily reported his wealth as being alongside Abramovic at 7 billion!

Hughesy World Cup

Hughesy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think it does give us some room for optimism that the trust did a good job of due diligence on the prospective buyers too….think Philip also mentioned they are worth more than he 1st thought too which is good – and their annual profits are also up.

Mattyblue World Cup

Mattyblue

Posted
Posted

But where are Venky's profits? Record profits this year of about £10 million.

'But they have a load of other companies'- as far as I'm aware they don't make large profit either.

Funding a PL football club is akin to flushing money down the toilet- how can they justify/afford it when they are a barely profitable company?

broadsword World Cup

broadsword

Posted
Posted

I think this story only goes to show that Venkys passed the criteria set out in the sale and Ahsan Ali Syed clearly didn't.

No, not really.

It goes to show that the trust were right to reject Syed. It doesn't really say anything at all about Venky's.

Gav

Gav

Posted
Posted

No, not really.

It goes to show that the trust were right to reject Syed. It doesn't really say anything at all about Venky's.

How do you work that out Bryan?

Syed didn't pass the criteria set out, Venkys did, so that fact alone says something about Venkys doesn’t it?

broadsword World Cup

broadsword

Posted
Posted

The fact that this has happened to Syed (defaulting on payments, etc) is nothing at all to do with Venky's.

Just plain logic, really.

Venky's of course would have had to have passed some sort of criteria. But you seem to be saying that because Syed failed in his bid (and is now embroiled in all sorts of difficulties) that must mean that Venky's are fit and proper owners.

When I think all we can really say is that Venky's, for all of the bad decisions they have made, are not as bad as Syed.

Amo World Cup

Amo

Posted
Posted

The fact that this has happened to Syed (defaulting on payments, etc) is nothing at all to do with Venky's.

Just plain logic, really.

Venky's of course would have had to have passed some sort of criteria. But you seem to be saying that because Syed failed in his bid (and is now embroiled in all sorts of difficulties) that must mean that Venky's are fit and proper owners.

When I think all we can really say is that Venky's, for all of the bad decisions they have made, are not as bad as Syed.

We're not talking about Venky's judgement but the fact their numbers added-up to the Trust's satisfaction.

Syed's clearly didn't, because he's a joker.

Gav

Gav

Posted
Posted

The fact that this has happened to Syed (defaulting on payments, etc) is nothing at all to do with Venky's.

Just plain logic, really.

Venky's of course would have had to have passed some sort of criteria. But you seem to be saying that because Syed failed in his bid (and is now embroiled in all sorts of difficulties) that must mean that Venky's are fit and proper owners.

When I think all we can really say is that Venky's, for all of the bad decisions they have made, are not as bad as Syed.

You seem to be dismisive of the fact Venkys passed the criteria and Syde didn't?

Certain criteria are set out for potential owners of football clubs, Syed didn’t meet that criteria and was turned away, venkys did meet the criteria and got the gig.

That fact alone says much about venkys compared to syed doesn’t it?

Only time will tell if the Venkys takeover proves successful, but I’d rather have them than Syed.

Syed's didn't, but was the criteria on Venky's harsh enough?

Are you implying the rules changed when Venkys came on the scene?

OscarRaven Premier League

OscarRaven

Posted
Posted

Syed's didn't, but was the criteria on Venky's harsh enough?

I'm no fan of Venky's and I'll be honest I think its going to end in tears but the bar to buy Rovers was set plenty high enough. Any higher and the club would never have sold.

Yes they have made mistakes and taken risks that in my eyes could have been managed better, but they have kept paying the wages, handed over money for players and as far as we know haven't taken out any additional debt (merely a facilty).

I'm not sure how Venky's can even be compared to Syed. There is a big difference between running a business 'your own way' and not paying the wages.

Looks like another good deed the Trust did the club protecting us from Syed, bet he was willing to pay more.

Yeah things are not perfect but they could be a lot worse.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.