martypellowe Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 Don't know if anyone else has seen this but this major sponsor that was rumoured to be unhappy has been named as WEC Group People article Another nail in Rovers' coffin? How big an impact would this have on the club?
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
BangkokRover Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 Don't know if anyone else has seen this but this major sponsor that was rumoured to be unhappy has been named as WEC Group People article Another nail in Rovers' coffin? How big an impact would this have on the club? When you can afford to give away your shirt to charity, why do you need anyone to sponsor a stand. Seriously thou a complete PR disaster, local company pulling out is not good. Back in the day we know John Williams would have picked up the phone contacted them but now who knows who is in charge of what?
martypellowe Posted November 15, 2011 Author Posted November 15, 2011 I was told the other day that the person i was speaking to was not allowed to say who the sponsor was until after it's come out in the tabloids, all I knew was that the company involved are supposedly being ignored by Venkys. It was also mentioned that Venkys had until today to arrange a meeting with them, whether that's been done or not I don't know. But now the cat's out the bag, how are Venkys going to put a spin on things? Maybe this should be brought up in the interview this week?
BangkokRover Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 I was told the other day that the person i was speaking to was not allowed to say who the sponsor was until after it's come out in the tabloids, all I knew was that the company involved are supposedly being ignored by Venkys. It was also mentioned that Venkys had until today to arrange a meeting with them, whether that's been done or not I don't know. But now the cat's out the bag, how are Venkys going to put a spin on things? Maybe this should be brought up in the interview this week? Sorry I am on not ITK so I will leave it for other people to answer. Cheers BKR
perthblue02 Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 When you can afford to give away your shirt to charity, why do you need anyone to sponsor a stand. Seriously thou a complete PR disaster, local company pulling out is not good. Back in the day we know John Williams would have picked up the phone contacted them but now who knows who is in charge of what? Why do they need sponsors they have a big mortgage to play with, bet Blingy Venky's drooling at thought of buying 20 Bugatti Veyron's , especially with all that space down at brockhall to ride round on with his hommies whilst listening to Notorious B.I.G's "Mo Money Mo Problems"
martypellowe Posted November 15, 2011 Author Posted November 15, 2011 I'd think Barclays would be more concerned as to how we're going to pay back the mortgage when we lose our sponsors and inevitably get relegated.
BangkokRover Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 I'd think Barclays would be more concerned as to how we're going to pay back the mortgage when we lose our sponsors and inevitably get relegated. I would guess al Barclays care about is the TV money. Cheers BKR
imy9 Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 I'd think Barclays would be more concerned as to how we're going to pay back the mortgage when we lose our sponsors and inevitably get relegated. Are Barclay's concerned? Question- why take the PJ money and then agree to give more money?
martypellowe Posted November 15, 2011 Author Posted November 15, 2011 I would guess al Barclays care about is the TV money. Cheers BKR I thought it was secured against all future income?
broadsword Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 They gave us more money because the security's screwed down good and proper. They'll get their money back if we go down, but doing so will completely break us.
BPF Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 They gave us more money because the security's screwed down good and proper. They'll get their money back if we go down, but doing so will completely break us. It certainly seems as though failure to survive will result in the end of the club.
martypellowe Posted November 15, 2011 Author Posted November 15, 2011 It certainly seems as though failure to survive will result in the end of the club. You could argue the fire sale after we get relegated will cover a lot of debt. But then again after we lose Hoilett in January, who do we have apart from Samba that could be worth half decent money? The club would be in a selling position and other teams would know that. Players go cheap. Doesn't look good, which is why it is imperative we stay up.
Plastic Head Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 Barclays will surely know that if the club gets into big money trouble they will be well behind the players in the queue for their money....??
broadsword Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 Barclays will surely know that if the club gets into big money trouble they will be well behind the players in the queue for their money....?? I can't remember the rules for who gets first dibs on the assets when a company goes bust, but Barclays would be the major creditor and would be head of the queue I would think. It really depends how much of the facility has been used. But I can't imagine Venky's wanting to pump cash in if it looks like we'll go down (and perhaps next month we'll be dead certs to do so). In that case, the running costs will come out of the mortgage facility, presumably we'll go down owing a fairly eye-watering sum. Barclays will want to grab the parachute payment whenever that comes out and that may not even cover all the debt. In which case we'd have a fire sale. Unless of course, Venky's have a major change of heart and decide to pump tens of millions in and vow to get us promoted. A likely eventuality I'm sure. All of this is guesswork on my part.
martypellowe Posted November 15, 2011 Author Posted November 15, 2011 I can't remember the rules for who gets first dibs on the assets when a company goes bust, but Barclays would be the major creditor and would be head of the queue I would think. It really depends how much of the facility has been used. But I can't imagine Venky's wanting to pump cash in if it looks like we'll go down (and perhaps next month we'll be dead certs to do so). In that case, the running costs will come out of the mortgage facility, presumably we'll go down owing a fairly eye-watering sum. Barclays will want to grab the parachute payment whenever that comes out and that may not even cover all the debt. In which case we'd have a fire sale. Unless of course, Venky's have a major change of heart and decide to pump tens of millions in and vow to get us promoted. A likely eventuality I'm sure. All of this is guesswork on my part. I think in that scenario the owners would have no choice but to pump their own money in, or face liquidaton. Then again they may not have used any of the mortgage yet and it could just be sat in Rovers' bank for a rainy day?
2PAC 4 Blackburn Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 This rumour was flooting about around a week ago, great shame that no one can get through to Venkys apart from JA. Surely they must think not all of these people can be wrong?!!
BiggusLaddus Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 I can't remember the rules for who gets first dibs on the assets when a company goes bust, but Barclays would be the major creditor and would be head of the queue I would think. Football debts first, to other clubs and to players, then the tax man. Creditors get to fight over the scraps.
martypellowe Posted November 15, 2011 Author Posted November 15, 2011 This rumour was flooting about around a week ago, great shame that no one can get through to Venkys apart from JA. Surely they must think not all of these people can be wrong?!! They can think what they want. We can't though I know the rumour was around but this is the first time i've seen the sponsor's name mentioned
Paul Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 Barclays will surely know that if the club gets into big money trouble they will be well behind the players in the queue for their money....?? It's true football debts come first but I think it is a nailed on certainty Barclays will have an agreement that protects them against this risk. As for the sponsor leaving I knew the name before the Chelsea game The value of the squad in a fire sale? £25m tops, perhaps £30-35m if Samba and Holiett are still here. Relegation would leave the club destitute.
SIMON GARNERS 194 Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 What a disgrace,a well known LOCAL company who are Rovers supporters at the very top being forced to take this level of action. Just what is going on,just what the hell is happening here!
sentient Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 Just a shame that the Fans Forum can't see fit to show some leadership of fans and resign. Can't believe they are still listening into their youhurt pots in vain hope of hearing old bilgeasses voice. Do something FF and at least make a statement - it might not work but at least we will know that you aren't in bilgeasses bag pocket.
booth Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 What a shame, known about this for a bit and WEC have given them every opportunity to meet and discuss this but have been ignored. Even offering more support. Then been ignored again. Disgusting behavior for a sponsor that's been pumping money into the club for eight years and who are big Rovers fans. That People article makes out that it's because of the protests and suchlike. In reality this is the ultimate protest by a major supporter and sponsor, I can assure you. By the way I can back all of this up.
rebelmswar Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 I swear Kean must be Jesus to these people... What is going on with not talking to a major sponsor about what they sponsor. Bloody madness.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.