[Archived] Venky's willing to sell?

[Clitherover]

Yes that would require only one win and a £2 layout per supporter. Now we are talking,

Count me in, even I can afford that!

[OscarRaven]

Yes that would require only one win and a £2 layout per supporter. Now we are talking,

Finally a serious alternative!!! and no abuse to boot, good one!

So 20,000 supporters @ £2.00 ea gives us a 0.0171626972% chance of winning.

So we all need to buy 5827 tickets to cover all the options, however because the jackpot is only 32% of the prize fund we can expect to pick some winnings beyond just the jackpot. So lets borrow a few million quid from a bank for the extra tickets (as we will get this back in addition to the jackpot) and call it 5000 tickets each so £10,000 per supporter will do.

The model is also infinitley scaleable, each ticket (or shall we call them shares) can go for as little as £2.00 if neccessary, we just have to increase the number of supporters to compensate.

Sound familar? How long have you been working on it?

It's ridiculous even discussing it....I just find it funny.

Careful, opinions like that will get you branded thick!

Although there are a couple of flaws in the plan - please don't ask questions or point them out!

[No Nay Never]

Finally a serious alternative!!! and no abuse to boot, good one!

So 20,000 supporters @ £2.00 ea gives us a 0.0171626972% chance of winning.

So we all need to buy 5827 tickets to cover all the options, however because the jackpot is only 32% of the prize fund we can expect to pick some winnings beyond just the jackpot. So lets borrow a few million quid from a bank for the extra tickets (as we will get this back in addition to the jackpot) and call it 5000 tickets each so £10,000 per supporter will do.

Its also infinitley scaleable, each ticket (or shall we call them shares) can go for as little as £2.00 if neccessary, we just have to increase the number of supporters.

Sound familar? How long have you been working on it?

Careful, opinions like that will get you branded thick!

It just came too me, with the help of my business degree.

[RevidgeBlue]

All I can say after reading the article in the LT is - is it April the 1st already?

I'm frankly surprised the LT have given column space to such sheeite. Doing some sensible contingency planning behind the scenes is one thing. Going public with a completely half baked scheme which requires our eventual relegation when we're in the midst of a relegation battle is quite thing.

Wayne giving it the big one about 1k being "half the cost of a good holiday" just about sums it up.

Shame on you LT for printing such tripe.

[No Nay Never]

All I can say after reading the article in the LT is - is it April the 1st already?

I'm frankly surprised the LT have given column space to such sheeite. Doing some sensible contingency planning behind the scenes is one thing. Going public with a completely half baked scheme which requires our eventual relegation when we're in the midst of a relegation battle is quite thing.

Wayne giving it the big one about 1k being "half the cost of a good holiday" just about sums it up.

Shame on you LT for printing such tripe.

Exactly, it probably is half the cost of a good holiday for him, who will be on around 100k per year. In the real world though a number of people Blackburn and surrounding areas won't be on a quarter of his salary.

[Roost]

It just came too me, with the help of my business degree.

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

Maybe it's because I'm 3,500 miles away but my overall impression of the BRAG has been clouded by what has seemed to be a lack of transparency. Loads of meetings with the club, about what I have never seen any detail; the crosshairs switched at random from one target to the next, now seemingly done at the behest of individuals championing a "bid"; and now involvement with some well-meaning guys who have a plan shoudl we get relegated. All done with the best of intentions I'm sure, but all done without communicating that's what's being done and why. Any further initiatives by BRAG will now have any reasonable people wondering what or who is behind the next change in direction

They have a website, and a Facebook Group, where every is out in the open. Of course some things have to remain discrete, otherwise they never would get anywhere trying to open a dialogue. But just because it isn't spelled out on these forums doesn't mean it isn't out there in the open domain.

[RevidgeBlue]

Finally a serious alternative!!! and no abuse to boot, good one!

So 20,000 supporters @ £2.00 ea gives us a 0.0171626972% chance of winning.

So we all need to buy 5827 tickets to cover all the options, however because the jackpot is only 32% of the prize fund we can expect to pick some winnings beyond just the jackpot. So lets borrow a few million quid from a bank for the extra tickets (as we will get this back in addition to the jackpot) and call it 5000 tickets each so £10,000 per supporter will do.

The model is also infinitley scaleable, each ticket (or shall we call them shares) can go for as little as £2.00 if neccessary, we just have to increase the number of supporters to compensate.

Sound familar? How long have you been working on it?

Lol Lol Lol Lol.

Actually that scheme has far more chance of success than the Wild/Gresko proposal because the tickets can actually be bought for a set figure whereas there is obviously no chance whatsoever the Rao's will let the Club go for nothing.

[trueblue]

All I can say after reading the article in the LT is - is it April the 1st already?

I'm frankly surprised the LT have given column space to such sheeite. Doing some sensible contingency planning behind the scenes is one thing. Going public with a completely half baked scheme which requires our eventual relegation when we're in the midst of a relegation battle is quite thing.

Wayne giving it the big one about 1k being "half the cost of a good holiday" just about sums it up.

Shame on you LT for printing such tripe.

Sorry Rev.. but I don't agree with your take on things, for me it IS a contingency plan - to be used IF Rovers are relegated

So do you advocate people doing nothing until either Rovers are safe or relegated before planning action?

[Mattyblue]

Contigency plans are essential, JW had one in case the worse happened. Christ knows what Venky's plan invovles (selling everything that's not bolted down, I would presume).

But this scheme just seems to be total fantasy island.

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

So anyone who has a different view from your good self is thick? Somehow I don't think you are selling your "pie in the sky" plan particularly well if you have to resort to insulting the very people you are looking to get investment.

I honestly think you are thick if you say it is fact that any Rovers supporter actually wants the club to be relegated. I also think that a lot of these objections, even though they are natural reactions, are uninformed and knee-jerk. For example, Brockhall and Ewood are in fact protected from being sold by covenants in the purchase contract Venoys sIgned...so they really can't use the major fixed assets of the Club to strip it, as has been suggested, nor are they as such of any real value to them. The point is that especially for the Venkys, the value on the club lies in being the Premier league, because they have admitted as much that this is mainly a marketing vehicle for them to expand their brand into new markets, and was actually cheaper than launching a large marketing campaign and investing in infrastructure in Europe and Asia. The whole idea was to use the Rovers' brand to further their own, and they thought they could do it without putting in any extra cash. The problem is that they have royally failed due to many many bad management decisions, and it has been beyond them to get to grasps with the business of football in time to right the ship properly, and they refuse to take responsibility for that by putting in any new money.

[RevidgeBlue]

But this scheme just seems to be total fantasy island.

Boss, Boss the plane's coming!

[Ste B]

They have a website, and a Facebook Group, where every is out in the open. Of course some things have to remain discrete, otherwise they never would get anywhere trying to open a dialogue. But just because it isn't spelled out on these forums doesn't mean it isn't out there in the open domain.

Problem is that if its pushed by just one group then the majority of fans will see this as "part of the protests". Now I know that isnt the case, but thats the perception people WILL have with this.

[Roost]

Sorry Rev.. but I don't agree with your take on things, for me it IS a contingency plan - to be used IF Rovers are relegated

So do you advocate people doing nothing until either Rovers are safe or relegated before planning action?

Its a contingency plan if:

Venkys are willing to give the club away for nothing

10,000 people have PAID the £1000 each BEFORE the season ends

Barclays are happy to have loan repayments deferred (thats even if they allow the transfer of debt to new owners)

Without all of the above its nothing but a fag packet plan.

[PAFELL]

I think people need to understand that the Buyout plan is still at a very early stage. Some of the numbers looks like they have been taken out from thin air, but that's not unusual at an early stage of a business plan.

I totally understand that people are starting to plan for a possible relegation and venkys doing a leeds/portsmouth.

I will support every fan who are spending their own time in doing whats good for rovers, and I don't want to choke a matchstick before the fireplace is burning.

As the plans are still at a early stage it is hard to commit for a 1000£ deposit but if the time comes I'm sure I will do it because I know they have already worked 6 months on it and I trust the two Ians and Wayne wild will not go in to something if the investment of many thousand rovers fans who don't have the same cash as they do are at high risk.

I don't see this fans ownership working but maybe in partnership with some other investors it might work.

Also if we manage to buy the club we will control who we are sold to. If walkers trust and JW sold us to venkys, imagine who venkys will sell us to

I do not think the plan even involves the two Ian's. It was not long ago that Glen was commiting about Ian Battersby's trip to Pune and Jerome Andersons role in the same. Even though Ian Battersby answered and gave good explanation to have that trip happened and the arrangements. That appears to have been rejected by Glen.

I think I would be happy to support a consortium with the Two Ian's involved. But buying the club with fans wages is not a good idea. We already pay the players, the club etc everytime we go through the turnstyle. If we were talking about an amature club, such as Ebbsfleet who did a simular thing, it would be different.

BRAGS idea is dependant on Rovers going down. Well they must have cursed WBA yesterday. Their victory and Rovers the day before, took us out the bottom 3. BRAG's motives from now on will be questioned by many, even if it has not already been questioned.

[Guest TheArtistFormallyKnownAsJB]

It's a massive "damned if you don't, damned if you do" situation for the organisers of such contingency plans. Some of you lot need a reality check, wasting peoples time by blatantly mocking an attempt to put some pressure on the owners.. Have most of you even read the terms mentioned?

I still believe that you need to take into account the pride involved with the plans the Rao''s made for the club. This is the reason why I am 99% certain Venkys will not sell. They will not admit the mistake they have made, they will not budge one inch.

We all have to admit that whatever WW and the rest of the BRAG do is in the best interest of the club. Yes -some may use this chance for a chance to self promote, but lobbying the owners through official means is the only way in which anything will happen. Protests, letters, emails, all a waste of time as proved. The only way this will change is through global opinion and government pressure, and we all know exactly what was said in parliament by a member of the action group lately.

Keep up the good work. Some may disagree with the approach, but I implore others to welcome the transparency of BRAG's proposal.

[Amo]

Couldn't everyone round up their old mobiles and send them to Envirofone?

[RevidgeBlue]

Sorry Rev.. but I don't agree with your take on things, for me it IS a contingency plan - to be used IF Rovers are relegated

So do you advocate people doing nothing until either Rovers are safe or relegated before planning action?

Come on true blue all this isn't a "plan" as such it's complete nonsense.

It's like me saying "I've formulated a plan for our survival. We'll be ok as long as it snows on August 21st."

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

I don't think comments like that are helpful? If you want people to look seriously at any proposal that may be forthcoming then treating them with the same contempt as our current owners treat them, is hadly going to get the desired reaction. We are not thick. We are simply sceptical about any plan that does not involve someone putting in a majority of the cash required to purchase and run the club. We know that the majority of Rovers fans we know don't have spare cash or, if they did, would easily find other uses to which it could be put. We know that even if an initial sum could be raised there is then a question about ongoing financial input, which we certainly couldn't commit ourselves to. Nothing you have said so far has addressed any of these quite legitimate concerns. I know you have told us that we should wait and see the full proposal, but if that is the case then why be rude to us now. We're far more likely to look properly if encouraged rather than insulted.

You point is very well taken, and for the second time in this thread I apologize for being rude. I just get very frustrated at these kinds of posts, because in addition to them being rude in the first place, they are dismissive in a hostile sense - attacking anyone who supports the concept by claiming they must want the club to be relegated, and states it as fact. If it doesn't do that, then the person who wrote it actually still comes to this conclusion, even after having read all the discussion to that point. To me that is stupid. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude. The third option is that this person did not even read the discussion to this point, and thus is lazy in addition to this. IMHO.

I have shown that I gladly will take up an intelligent discussion, and I don't claim that this is fool proof by any means, or that it is guaranteed or somehow easy - no one is ever claiming that it will be easy. What is there out there that is worth doing that is easy? I have actually given many answers regarding the ongoing financial needs of the club, right here in this thread, and in the other two that are here on this site discussing the fund concept.

Wayne has posted the summary, which is a four page slide show highlighting the main points, on Twitter. He has also set up a new website to gather interest and sentiment, here. The slide show summary can also be found there, and here. It obviously doesn't answer all detailed questions that will arise, there is no way a 4 page slide show can do that. I can tell you that Wayne and I are working every free moment we have - I mean I am at work and shouldn't be here right now, but I am. The digital version of the LT article is here.

[PAFELL]

You point is very well taken, and for the second time in this thread I apologize for being rude. I just get very frustrated at these kinds of posts, because in addition to them being rude in the first place, they are dismissive in a hostile sense - attacking anyone who supports the concept by claiming they must want the club to be relegated, and states it as fact. If it doesn't do that, then the person who wrote it actually still comes to this conclusion, even after having read all the discussion to that point. To me that is stupid. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude. The third option is that this person did not even read the discussion to this point, and thus is lazy in addition to this. IMHO.

I have shown that I gladly will take up an intelligent discussion, and I don't claim that this is fool proof by any means, or that it is guaranteed or somehow easy - no one is ever claiming that it will be easy. What is there out there that is worth doing that is easy? I have actually given many answers regarding the ongoing financial needs of the club, right here in this thread, and in the other two that are here on this site discussing the fund concept.

Wayne has posted the summary, which is a four page slide show highlighting the main points, on Twitter. He has also set up a new website to gather interest and sentiment, here. The slide show summary can also be found there, and here. It obviously doesn't answer all detailed questions that will arise, there is no way a 4 page slide show can do that. I can tell you that Wayne and I are working every free moment we have - I mean I am at work and shouldn't be here right now, but I am. The digital version of the LT article is here.

It will not work for a proffessional club.

Maximum 2 years in the championship - that is an arrogant expectation.

People do not have the money to get involved.

The club will not be sold cheap by venkys. How could they do this and hope to face save at the sametime.

If Rovers stay up this season, the plan has already failed.

If you, wayne wild, Glen Mullen think that all is needed is 10mill for the club, you are more seriously deluded, than venkys.

[Exiled in Toronto]

It's a while since I used to review business plans but, quite frankly, I have never seen such a fantasy masquerading as a plan. The assumptions are ludicrous.

- the owners will give away an asset valued at c50 million for nothing

- wages can be halved over one summer with no exodus of players

- operating costs can be halved over one summer

- another Souness can be found when we have no transfer budget

I always worked by the mantra that any plan is only as good as its worst assumption; there are plenty to choose from here.

The annualised financials are also way off: if any of the above assumptions, plus any of several others, aren't met, the 10 million fund is wiped out and then some - where's the contingency funding going to come from?

This should never have been made public at this stage

[bannedwidth]

It's pie in the sky b0l1ocks. Get a grip....sigh.

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

Can I give you some advice? If you have something to sell I suggest you lay off the personal abuse of the 'customers'.

I am probably in the minority of supporters who can chip in to buy the club but quite frankly as much as I love the proposal, two or three things are beginning to worry me.

1) Firstly, you seem to have undergone a complete personality change since your opening post. Yes some posters are putting 2 + 2 together and getting 8. Instead of abusing them - explain it again in the same calm way you did when you started here. I hope this is just the result of some late nights and a passion for your project and not the real you coming through.

2) The response from Glen as usual is heartfelt and passionate and for me his integrity and motives are beyond question, but if the action group is involved in a buy out then it is no longer objective. That fundamentally changes things for me (and some other supporters it would seem). Glen is very good at the rousing support and has done a tremendous job at cutting through the apathy but I would suggest his tough experiences, passion, shear emotional investment and vow of "whatever it takes" will no longer allow him to look at the situation objectively.

That's my opinion now if I have to post an alternative business plan (not just ideas, which I have) or show my 'battle scars' to be able to say that then I better take my 'thoughts' and 'opinions' elsewhere. However you can't have supporter unity if you don't allow challenge and questioning. In addition no-one will sink thousands into the club if they can't ask questions about the people they are giving the money too, no matter how blind their love for the club is!

I'm all for contingency planning but the fact that the proposal that BRAG is supporting can only come into effect if the club is relegated means that any future protesters or protests affiliated with them could (wrongly) be labeled as wanting the club relegated.

This is the problem.

I don't want the club relegated; I don't want an FA probe; I don't want points deductions; I don't want administration; I don't want the contingency plan activating; I don't want supporters further divided.

I want the current owners to run the club properly (competent managers at all levels). It is not personal, it is not an attempt to undermine anyone, it's looking at the facts and coming to one (of many) conclusions.

Again point, well taken. Your point 1) is absolutely correct. Apology number three.

What and who do you suggest support the plan then, and who could ever be perceived to have an objective viewpoint once they voice their support? It seems like you are suggesting that anyone who supports it will then have their objectivity ruined, and will automatically want to see the club relegated? How is that? Why is that? It goes a long way towards the culture of suspicion that has been festering over the Club for the last 15 months. What is the alternative? Not doing anything? You can't very well slap something together when the crap is already splattered all over the room, you have to do it before it hits the fan. It does not mean they will lose objectivity. They will still go to the matches, they will still cheer every goal and every win...because each of those things would bring us one step closer to not having to do this in the first place.

I totally agree that people should not just hand over any amount of money without asking questions that satisfy them, and I am sure that a Q&A session will be scheduled, if there is enough interest and support shown to warrant it. I think that would be an excellent idea.

You absolutely don't have to come up with a complete and alternative plan to voice your opinion or ask questions. Your last three lines I think everyone is in agreement on, including myself, including Wayne, and including Glen and all of BRAG. If the Venkys came in and put £50m in the coffers tomorrow and reinstated a proper board of directors to run the club as they see fit to meet the goals Venkys have for the Club, and are allowed the authority to do so, then I would shut up and go back to being a happy supporter again. But this is all old ground we are covering here - we can all agree this isn't going to happen. Venkys won't put any more money into Rovers than this supporters' initiative would - less even.

This period in the Club's history should be a wake up call for everyone. Never has there been such supporter division, instability on and off the field, and I say this having talked to lots of 50-60 year supporters who feel this way. We need to unite to save the club, and I feel that I have not been contributing to that unity in some of my posts here in the past 24 hours. For that I apologize again, and hope I can start again.

And you want me to hand over £1000 of my money?

Not to me!

Well if that is your attitude then the main flaw in this plan is you. This is not the first time you have been abusive to supporters.

Well for my side, I am too think to even think about parting with a £1000 for this half baked idea. That was put together by an abusive individual. There was me thinking that the clubs PR and Venkys PR was one of the worse I have seen. You have just beaten them hands down with that remark.

Yep, and I put my hands up and say I am ashamed to have written that. It was not only rude, but short sighted, and heat of the moment. All of which are things the written word should not be.

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

The frustrations of piecemeal Internet info/leaks/ITKs and half-truths and it's effect on fans is plain for all to see - I think everyone has a right to an opinion and no-one deserves to be shot down in flames, it's just that it's so easy to do on a forum isn't it? We are all supporters at the end of the day and if we can't play nice....I don't think _anyone_ wants to see the club relegated, but as has been alluded to previously sometimes making a shrewd business transaction is all in the timing....

Now, to the proposal document, the following assumptions are made;

- The Club can be acquired with a token or zero cash payment

Is there anything at all from Venkys that gives anyone hope this will happen? They are going to want something between fair market value and what they paid/put in - I don't know enough about their business to know how they release parts of it? Isn't there an issue with a film production company or something? If they had a history of releasing business units at next to no money I'd be more hopeful - alas as has already been mentioned on here, culturally failure is more of an issue over there, it's a part of life in the UK sadly.

- Barclays agree to protracted repayment of debt

Are Barclays Rovers fans?! I can see the sense in this, the "fund" raised by the investment would act as the buffer and show the bank that the company could be all grown up and manage it's debt, BUT you have to have very patient and sympathetic bankers, and if anything they are unsettled as things stand now - perhaps an ownership change would buy some more confidence?

- The club will return to the Premiership in no more than 2 years

Given the competitive nature of the Championship this is a big risk imo, but not unreasonable, however I think there would be bigger problems....although as a side note the assumed projection of the finances appears to infer that the club would stay in the Premiership for the following five years (2016-2020) or am I reading that wrong? If bouncing back up from the Championship on a timescale is a big risk, surely staying in the league for five more years is an even bigger one?

- Wages reduced

This was my personal assumption but I can see from the projections that in actual fact the wage bill would increase year on year from the "return" to the Premiership. But I'm slightly confused where the drastic reduction in wages comes from in 2013, is this the assumption that high-earning players will be sold and replaced with those on a lesser wage or that the current players would accept less?

- Experienced manager/management team found

For me this is absolutely key, but what about removing the current team? Isn't that going to cost a few quid? There's going to be some contracts to pay up. And then we have to assume that the chosen replacements will not hold us to ransom over stupid amounts of money!

- Player sales reinvested

This has been mentioned on here before and done to death, but unless you have an Uncle Jack style benefactor buying and selling is part of the process - it's a sad part of the process but something that has to happen, asset trading. I think with a quality scouting network, and likewise on a development/training system we could bring young players through - if only it were easy to spot them!

All in all it's a strategy based on a whole heap of assumptions and risks - I'd love to see the plan in more detail and I think that before too much time it will have to be expanded upon before it starts to lose creditability - I would be willing to invest, and I'm sure some of the "at a distance" fans, be they in the UK or abroad, would do so to. The Internet (as annoying as it can be) can give us the opportunity to involved people all over the world - I've no idea how that would be managed but it would be worth a shot.

For what it's worth and what I've seen/read of Wayne Wild he seems a switched on guy, if he's the man to kick this off then fine. If relegation happens, and I think with our run-in it's something we'd do exceptionally well to avoid, and this plan is ready to move forward let's see what happens.

But....and you knew there was a but coming didn't you? And forgive me if I missed an important bit of information but I did just speed read the last 6000 pages!

Two things worry me.....does anyone actually believe that Venyks would let the club go quickly? We've all seen the "speed" with which things happen, see last day transfers for that, and perhaps more worryingly it was mentioned further up that parachute payment monies would be utilised to fund wages over the two Championship seasons - are the Venkys going to be daft enough to give the club away and those payments? If they aren't here as asset strippers they certainly would take the carpets and the light bulbs on the way out!

Any plan needs to reasonably assume that there will be little of any value left here when they do finally leave, and that would logically include parachute payments, some player revenue and probably the bulk of any season ticket sales....

Sorry if I ask more questions than I answer, but I thought I'd get my thoughts/feelings out!

GREAT Post. I am at work so don't have time to answer the thought processes being everything right now, but just wanted to say well done with your questions. These are exactly the kind of things that should be brought up and discussed.

[Parsonblue]

I honestly think you are thick if you say it is fact that any Rovers supporter actually wants the club to be relegated.

Actually, if you had bothered to read what I wrote I think you will find that I didn't suggest anybody wanted to see the Rovers relegated. I note that Mr. Wild states that his plan is an option only if the club are relegated and that it wouldn't work if we remain in the Premier League. Personally, I believe it wouldn't work in the Championship either, but that's only my opinion.

As you clearly have difficulty in taking on board opinions other than your own it's difficult to see how you are going to cope with a serious debate on this subject. As I said earlier, opting to insult the very people you want to buy into this "pie in the sky" scheme is not the greatest marketing strategy, indeed, it's the sort of strategy I would expect from the present owners.