[Archived] Rumour: Venky's To Sell?

[den]

Don't worry, he'll soon be gone again

Seems to me that, whether you agree with him or not, TGM was putting forward a reasoned argument. The replies seem to be inadequate and focus on wanting him banned.

[tony gale's mic]

Seems to me that, whether you agree with him or not, TGM was putting forward a reasoned argument. The replies seem to be inadequate and focus on wanting him banned.

Thanks den, though my absence wasn't due to a ban - I had only been banned for 2 hours. But the season was over and there was very little but bad news to talk about...

[booth]

how can you say we would be relegated are you mystic meg as well, we have a better squad than the teams that came up and a great youth system, also look what Bolton did last season with the debt there in, I accept things aren't great right now but to come out with the line we will be relegated is utterly stupid and naive of you,

If you look at our squad it's not the greatest, and if we lose Samba we're screwed. We've already lost two of our best players at the end of last season in the two Jones lads. I see five players in our current squad who you could count on in a relegation scrap to make a difference. And one of those stands in the nets. Another is yet to sign a new contract. Another one may go to pastures new.

Players in the past like Dunn, Nelson and Salgado are now getting on and won't be able to be counted on over an entire season.

Venky's are rumoured to be looking at bargain basement buys because they aren't willing to throw good money after bad, especially when someone else may take over soon. With the current transfer situation, this rumour seems to be becoming reality. Pavone? Ribeiro? We aren't even looking at free transfers from the English leagues, which I suspect is due to high wages.

If you really think otherwise then you're in no position to use the word naive.

[BangkokRover]

You're one of the most pompous arseholes on this board (sorry in advance mods..).

Come on guys is there any need for name calling?

[yeti-dog]

A quick copy and paste job into Word counted 503 words in that post.

Yet you very oddly chose to focus on just one word.

How very strange.

If I say you are talking rubbish then proceed to justify exactly why I think you're talking rubbish, then that's perfectly defensible. I tell my best friends when I think they're talking rubbish too. I tell my girlfriend when she's talking rubbish (sometimes).

Pretty sure you calling me an arsehole just classifies as abuse though.

If you don't want to debate the topic at hand, then that's your prerogative. But there's absolutely no need for the abuse yeti, there's a good boy.

Why does it not surprise me that you also inform everyone close to you that they talk rubbish also...how to win friends and influence people.

You make my point by your response (which I've bolded). You dismissed my comments as rubbish,that then made less inclined to read your response when you'd already disregarded mine so arrogantly.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Your argument is flawed by arguing that all players lose value. They don't.

No they don't. The problem is that, on average, we have sold for a big profit one per season, but we have 60+ players on the books who all get pay increases or hanf around for the entirity of their contract not playing. That is why we have not once spent the fee received, half of it goes to fund the wages of players we cannot shift due to our wage policy.

Mark Hughes's much better than average signings record delayed the inevitable.

[rogerjonesgloves]

A quick copy and paste job into Word counted 503 words in that post.

Yet you very oddly chose to focus on just one word.

How very strange.

If I say you are talking rubbish then proceed to justify exactly why I think you're talking rubbish, then that's perfectly defensible. I tell my best friends when I think they're talking rubbish too. I tell my girlfriend when she's talking rubbish (sometimes).

If you don't want to debate the topic at hand, then that's your prerogative. But there's absolutely no need for the abuse yeti, there's a good boy.

You just can't resist can you.

[tony gale's mic]

Why does it not surprise me that you also inform everyone close to you that they talk rubbish also...how to win friends and influence people.

You make my point by your response (which I've bolded). You dismissed my comments as rubbish,that then made less inclined to read your response when you'd already disregarded mine so arrogantly.

If someone wants to call my posts or opinions rubbish, as long as they justify it and are willing to discuss it then I have absolutely no problems with it. I don't understand why it would cause you quite so much distress. If someone replies to my posts with a personal attack and no actual football debate, like you and so many others do, that is less acceptable.

I'd much sooner have friends who would tell me when I was in the wrong then blindly agree with everything I say and do. Wouldn't you?

Anyway, this is going off topic so back to the football. Do you care to answer any of my points?

[den]

No they don't. The problem is that, on average, we have sold for a big profit one per season, but we have 60+ players on the books who all get pay increases or hanf around for the entirity of their contract not playing. That is why we have not once spent the fee received, half of it goes to fund the wages of players we cannot shift due to our wage policy.

Mark Hughes's much better than average signings record delayed the inevitable.

Yes, I agree that having a wage/turnover ratio as high as we have had [it was reduced by the trust BTW] isn't great. I wouldn't say it wasn't sustaniable though. We've been running at that level under plenty of managers other than Mark Hughes.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Yes, I agree that having a wage/turnover ratio as high as we have had [it was reduced by the trust BTW] isn't great. I wouldn't say it wasn't sustaniable though. We've been running at that level under plenty of managers other than Mark Hughes.

...either with a past owner who was happy to shovel in money or, since they stopped doing that, by building up an overdraft of 20 million, which had topped out.

Without either of those, and we now don't have either, it isn't sustainable other than by selling the unexpected crop of good youngsters, and then the cupboard really is bare.

[tony gale's mic]

Yes, I agree that having a wage/turnover ratio as high as we have had [it was reduced by the trust BTW] isn't great. I wouldn't say it wasn't sustaniable though. We've been running at that level under plenty of managers other than Mark Hughes.

Yep, and considering the amount of saleable talent in the squad (I count Phil Jones too obviously), we could have easily used some of the money from player sales to fund a budget hole. £16 million for Jones, if we sell Samba he'll go for £10 million minimum, if Hoilett was to sign a new contract he'd go for plenty, Olsson could generate a fair amount of revenue too...

Since Jacks death we've run our club on finding bargains and then either selling them off for a lot more money or turning them into consistent first team performers. Throughout this time we've had a high wage to turnover ratio. This has been sustained over at extended period of time so saying it's unsustainable isn't really accurate.

The crop of excellent young players in the last couple of years is actually a new development and something which would have made the sustainability of our business model even more viable. However unfortunately it's coincided with a complete turnaround in the way our club is being run.

[Mercer]

I think Philip's postings are bang on the money, as are Paul's concerns which he's flagged for some time now.

A number of posters have flagged concerns for many months now, however, I think, in the main, the majority have been more optimistic, advocating a 'wait and see', 'give them a chance' approach.

In my opinion, the club will very quickly reach the point of 'no return'. I don't think Venky's have anywhere to turn, have very few options and I think a sale is a 95% certainty as 'do nothing' could prove disastrous for them in more than one respect.

Again, in my opinion, the club is in a desperate, desperate state and don't be surprised if there is a further 'high profile resignation' this week.

[tony gale's mic]

Those who say our wage to turnover ratio was an example that the club was being run badly should take into account there's only three ways to rectify this:

1. Pay significantly lower wages than the vast majority of the rest of the league - not sustainable in itself

2. Somehow significantly increase the turnover of our club - not doable

3. Settle for lower league football where we can pay lower wages - not desirable, and also would decrease turnover significantly

If theres a fourth option out there then I'd like to hear it.

Saying "having a better Academy" isn't really a fourth option since a) our Academy has been producing some excellent talent of late, and B ) if you actually want to keep your Academy players, or sign them to long enough contracts to get a decent fee for them, you will need to pay them wages in line with the rest of the league.

[rogerjonesgloves]

Yes, I agree that having a wage/turnover ratio as high as we have had [it was reduced by the trust BTW] isn't great. I wouldn't say it wasn't sustaniable though. We've been running at that level under plenty of managers other than Mark Hughes.

The trust had to put in money to control the debt. So we run at a loss, something that cannot be sustained long term unless you have a super rich owner.

[booth]

That is a fantastic story Phillip.

Now how much of that can you prove? Yet you write it as fact, and here I was thinking people can change.

Bloody hell Imy, you really are desperate to like Venky's aren't you

[philipl]

Those who say our wage to turnover ratio was an example that the club was being run badly should take into account there's only three ways to rectify this:

1. Pay significantly lower wages than the vast majority of the rest of the league - not sustainable in itself

2. Somehow significantly increase the turnover of our club - not doable

3. Settle for lower league football where we can pay lower wages - not desirable, and also would decrease turnover significantly

If theres a fourth option out there then I'd like to hear it.

Saying "having a better Academy" isn't really a fourth option since a) our Academy has been producing some excellent talent of late, and B ) if you actually want to keep your Academy players, or sign them to long enough contracts to get a decent fee for them, you will need to pay them wages in line with the rest of the league.

The tragedy is we finally got a fantastic Academy set-up but that has been completely messed up in the last few months.

[mike at picture]

Bloody hell Imy, you really are desperate to like Venky's aren't you

You seem desperate to like Flip Flop Phil. Are you aware of his history of being completely incorrect about more or less everything?

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

I still surprise that the Walker's trust and family sold the club to these owners. Clearly now the walker's family must now regret selling the club to Venky's because we haven't move on as a club and we have lost key members of the board like JW and TF plus SA as manager.

It raises questions Chaddy but unfortunately some people can promise the earth but deliver nothing,even good people can be duped sometimes.They may have just scraped through due diligence,the fit and proper test but if they fail to keep promises after,well......

[Exiled in Toronto]

Those who say our wage to turnover ratio was an example that the club was being run badly should take into account there's only three ways to rectify this:

1. Pay significantly lower wages than the vast majority of the rest of the league - not sustainable in itself

2. Somehow significantly increase the turnover of our club - not doable

3. Settle for lower league football where we can pay lower wages - not desirable, and also would decrease turnover significantly

If theres a fourth option out there then I'd like to hear it.

Saying "having a better Academy" isn't really a fourth option since a) our Academy has been producing some excellent talent of late, and B ) if you actually want to keep your Academy players, or sign them to long enough contracts to get a decent fee for them, you will need to pay them wages in line with the rest of the league.

The status quo option is to lose money year in and year out while selling our best players - that has been the course since the Trust stopped putting money in. New owners may not want to do that, nor indeed keep carrying a 20 million debt, so they WILL then do one or more of your three options. Those options have clear risks, but the current has a certainty of losing money.

Without a sugar-daddy, it is obviously very debatable if a club can stay in this league for long. Hence, unless we magically get one, we cannot stay in a situation where our wage structure would mean liquidation if we were to be relegated.

[PAFELL]

You seem desperate to like Flip Flop Phil. Are you aware of his history of being completely incorrect about more or less everything?

Can you prove that statement? Lets be honest people on here often ask Philip and others to prove their information. so can you prove what you have posted? Or is it just your own opinion, your own agenda maybe. I am just asking the question and not having ago.

[mike at picture]

Can you prove that statement? Lets be honest people on here often ask Philip and others to prove their information. so can you prove what you have posted? Or is it just your own opinion, your own agenda maybe. I am just asking the question and not having ago.

Ooooh......where to start? How about Maradonna to Rovers or Utd going bust for starters numb nuts?

[roversfan99]

here is a blog about the owners and rovers

http://footballblog....rovers-fly.html

I totally agree with it

Probably the most accurate assessment of the state of our club I have seen, no Rover bashing, factual comments.

Thanks for the positive comments Kelbo and Chaddy. I copied it from my personal blog.

I never considered the possibilities of a sale, just concentrate on the mistakes they have made in my opinion.

[tony gale's mic]

The status quo option is to lose money year in and year out while selling our best players - that has been the course since the Trust stopped putting money in. New owners may not want to do that, nor indeed keep carrying a 20 million debt, so they WILL then do one or more of your three options. Those options have clear risks, but the current has a certainty of losing money.

Without a sugar-daddy, it is obviously very debatable if a club can stay in this league for long. Hence, unless we magically get one, we cannot stay in a situation where our wage structure would mean liquidation if we were to be relegated.

But the way the club had been run, from managerial appointments, to scouting, to player acquisitions and sales meant that relegation was barely even a threat in the vast majority of our time in this league. Selling your best players is something that happens to every club of our size (and has even had to happen to Manchester United on occasion, and is happening to Arsenal).

And our wage structure wouldnt mean liquidation even if relegated. Look at the most extreme example - Portsmouth. We have been nowhere near as bad as they were, and yet they finished mid table in the Championship, still in existence and can at least hope to have a shot at the playoffs next season such is the unpredictable nature of the league. I deliberately don't include Leeds in any comparison since their revenue potential and fan base is so much greater than ours.

[den]

...either with a past owner who was happy to shovel in money or, since they stopped doing that, by building up an overdraft of 20 million, which had topped out.

Without either of those, and we now don't have either, it isn't sustainable other than by selling the unexpected crop of good youngsters, and then the cupboard really is bare.

JW always thought the wage/turnover was sustainable. Not only that, he also thought that keeping the wage bill high as possible was one way of competing in this league. He didn't do a bad job with the finances available.

I take the point about the trusts financial input, but at the moment, we have Venky's who are putting in £5m/year that replaces the trusts input.

[Waggy76]

I think Philip's postings are bang on the money, as are Paul's concerns which he's flagged for some time now.

A number of posters have flagged concerns for many months now, however, I think, in the main, the majority have been more optimistic, advocating a 'wait and see', 'give them a chance' approach.

In my opinion, the club will very quickly reach the point of 'no return'. I don't think Venky's have anywhere to turn, have very few options and I think a sale is a 95% certainty as 'do nothing' could prove disastrous for them in more than one respect.

Again, in my opinion, the club is in a desperate, desperate state and don't be surprised if there is a further 'high profile resignation' this week.

Who might that be Steve Kean ???