[Archived] Debt Free

[allanncd]

I would guess they've paid off Barclays and refinanced with State Bank of India - probably for a higher amount. That's not paying off debt!

[mattyboy6000]

I would guess they've paid off Barclays and refinanced with State Bank of India - probably for a higher amount. That's not paying off debt!

this seems the obvious thing

[Amo]

Yeah, poor old naive Onion (Balaji), Venkys aren't the bad guys at all are they, get rid of Kean and it's all sunshine and lollipops down at Ewood.

Can't see past his own nose. Just wants Kean gone so he can become Rovers's greatest superfan again.

[Lathund]

With all the cost-cutting, and the transfer money from Samba and Jones not being reinvested, perhaps we are debt free. But the fact that Balaji says we are makes me seriously doubt it.

Plus, being debt-free would actually be a good thing. Good things don't happen to this club anymore, thus it will have to be BS.

[USABlue]

Northern Rover ‏ @Northern_Rover

Credible buyer for Rovers will be going public soon (possibly tomorrow) cannot say anymore until buyer goes public.

Just from Kamy on twitter

Dare to dream but this I will only believe when it actually happens. The thing I heard that scared me was in a Kean interview I saw on here where he referred to our young players as assets who's value will only increase. Totally gives the game away to me. I am sure JA and co are pulling out all the stops to make Venky's stick around. I'd love a full investigation to go on and have these sordid types banned from the game forever.

If we get shut of these idiotic fools we may just have a chance of restoring our club.

[philipl]

As part of the sale from the Walker Trust to Venkys, didn't they have to pay the £10m debt off?

So we were debt free when they took over.

Better than that, the sale agreement removed the £17m owed to Barclays and injected £10m in new capital.

[Roversider]

There have been comments that banking in India reduces the visibility of the accounts. Given that Rovers are still a UK registered company they continue to submit accounts as required by UK law.

However let's be realistic, even major shareholders of companies can't access the day to day financial details of the company. Barclays had more access because of the terms of the loan.

Some things the owners have done make sense - reduce the wage bill and clear debt (I have no major reason to disbelieve that statement) but theyve done it in a way that made relegation the most likely outcome. I would put Kean as a big contributor as he was the main voice in modifying their actions.

If you want more transparency then the only way isn't fans ownership, either full or partial. That's what I want.

Support BRSIT

[den]

Some things the owners have done make sense - reduce the wage bill and clear debt

We don't know whether they cleared the debt - do we?

However, if you want to play in the top league, you need good players and you need to pay the wages.

[Ricky]

Den, our wage to turnover percentage was too high but they addressed it in the wrong way. All the senior players were given bumper new contracts last January, a fact Kean seems to ignore when blaming the previous owners, and then they were all released or sold, madness.

The aim should have been to bring wages back in line, this could have happened naturally by bringing through younger players and selling a couple of older squad players.

They did it in completely the wrong way, I actually wonder if they have any idea at all how much relegation will cost them. I don't see them having the £30m it's likely to cost us.

[den]

Den, our wage to turnover percentage was too high but they addressed it in the wrong way. All the senior players were given bumper new contracts last January, a fact Kean seems to ignore when blaming the previous owners, and then they were all released or sold, madness.

The aim should have been to bring wages back in line, this could have happened naturally by bringing through younger players and selling a couple of older squad players.

They did it in completely the wrong way, I actually wonder if they have any idea at all how much relegation will cost them. I don't see them having the £30m it's likely to cost us.

I understand the point you're making Ricky, but do we know what the wage ratio was under Venky's? I don't.

As for Roversiders point that Venky's made a good decision to bring down the wage to turnover ratio, well if he means from the level it was prior to Venky's, then I have to disagree. It was higher than at other clubs, but the trustees and JW were happy to go along with that, because they knew that 1] it enabled us to stay in the PL, and 2] as JW said to me, BRFC exists solely to put a football team onto the field. They had no obligations to anyone else [shareholders etc] and that's why they were happy with the finances. If debt got too high, they sold a player or two. The club was run financially very well, under those owners.

If on the other hand, roversider means Venky's did a good job by bringing the wage to turnover down from their own inflated levels, well how can we congragulate them on that?

[Roversider]

I understand the point you're making Ricky, but do we know what the wage ratio was under Venky's? I don't.

As for Roversiders point that Venky's made a good decision to bring down the wage to turnover ratio, well if he means from the level it was prior to Venky's, then I have to disagree. It was higher than at other clubs, but the trustees and JW were happy to go along with that, because they knew that 1] it enabled us to stay in the PL, and 2] as JW said to me, BRFC exists solely to put a football team onto the field. They had no obligations to anyone else [shareholders etc] and that's why they were happy with the finances. If debt got too high, they sold a player or two. The club was run financially very well, under those owners.

If on the other hand, roversider means Venky's did a good job by bringing the wage to turnover down from their own inflated levels, well how can we congragulate them on that?

Den, I don't really care whether it was with Venkys or another owner (including the Walker Trust), the levels of wages at Rovers have been unsustainable unless you get income from selling players or constant injections of cash. The former is something we've done for a while but is risky and the latter is subject to the whims of the owners. The whole of football in the top flight is living beyond what is commercially sensible and it has to be addressed.

Jack Walker wanted the club to reach financial stability on its own after he put in a huge investment for which he looked for no return. The wage bills have spiralled since his time. Don't assume that I am flattering Venkys, they made a royal cock-up of how they did it and losing the Premier League income is much worse than the savings they have achieved.

Our wages were as a percentage of revenue one of the highest in the Premier, in £ terms we were in the top ten and miles above the likes of Swansea and Norwich. It had to be addressed but not the way this lot chose.

[den]

Den, I don't really care whether it was with Venkys or another owner (including the Walker Trust), the levels of wages at Rovers have been unsustainable unless you get income from selling players or constant injections of cash. The former is something we've done for a while but is risky and the latter is subject to the whims of the owners. The whole of football in the top flight is living beyond what is commercially sensible and it has to be addressed.

Jack Walker wanted the club to reach financial stability on its own after he put in a huge investment for which he looked for no return. The wage bills have spiralled since his time. Don't assume that I am flattering Venkys, they made a royal cock-up of how they did it and losing the Premier League income is much worse than the savings they have achieved.

Our wages were as a percentage of revenue one of the highest in the Premier, in £ terms we were in the top ten and miles above the likes of Swansea and Norwich. It had to be addressed but not the way this lot chose.

Of course they were, but I've just addressed what the trust and JW's approach to this was. Very successful it was as well. Kept us in the PL and I still don't see an argument for changing it. Just saying "it had to be addressed" is quite meaningless, unless it's backed up by some figures.

the levels of wages at Rovers have been unsustainable unless you get income from selling players or constant injections of cash. The former is something we've done for a while but is risky

The former wasn't risky Roversider, it was proven. If you want to look at risk, then look at Venky's management of the club and it's finances. Grief.

[Majiball]

Den's right.

Yes wages were high but wages relation to league position is well known. Venky's went to extreme as not being funny we only needed to drop 5-10%, do people really think we haven't dropped more? Just look at who's left all of them will have been on good money. They must have shaved 30%+ off the bill and look what has happened, we're relegated, down and out.

[Sandiway Blue]

The more fans who pledge to buy shares, the stronger will be BRSIT's negotiating power.

Whether that is to buy the club outright or to buy a significant supporter-owned stake in the club, who knows?

Hopefully, the open meeting on May 26 will encourage more people to pledge.

The idea of being able to buy the club outright is a lot more feasible now we are a second division club and should encourage more fans to believe we can do it.

And the more capital there is behind BRSIT the more likely are the owners to want to talk.

One tiny problem with that,as I have said before no way can enough people come up with £1,000 EACH to make this possible.

Drop the shares to £100 a share and you will have more people interested.Otherwise this will remain a (well intended) pipe dream.

[Roversider]

Of course they were, but I've just addressed what the trust and JW's approach to this was. Very successful it was as well. Kept us in the PL and I still don't see an argument for changing it. Just saying "it had to be addressed" is quite meaningless, unless it's backed up by some figures.

The former wasn't risky Roversider, it was proven. If you want to look at risk, then look at Venky's management of the club and it's finances. Grief.

Sorry Den, you misunderstand how you do risk management, you identify the risk - that the club could fail to find enough funds to run itself; understand the impact if that risk comes to pass - that the club could go into administration; judge the likelihood of that occurring and finally consider what risk you can tolerate. Risk management contains all those elements and in my opinion the levels of wages we were carrying (and the rest of the league for that matter) significantly increased the likelihood of the risk chrystallising into an issue. So some mitigating action was needed and I suggest that any new owner (post Venkys)would do the same. Clubs run on a neutral budget have a habit of surviving.

As for the spurious argument of we need to spend those levels to stay in the Premiership then look at the clubs that have stayed up this year in the form of Swansea and Norwich with wage bills c. £20 million less than us (or Bolton). Its true you can spend more as an established Premier club and that is where we have been. Alternatively we could go for broke and win something as Portsmouth did.

We need a change of owners to someone who understands the need to keep the Rovers in good order - if Venkys can transform to that then hoorah! Personally I believe the best way is for BRSIT to move forward, probably in partnership with someone else.

I want a club that my grandchildren can support and if that means we are more akin to Blackpool with some years in the Premier, some years in the Championship and some years lower so what.

[Roversider]

One tiny problem with that,as I have said before no way can enough people come up with £1,000 EACH to make this possible.

Drop the shares to £100 a share and you will have more people interested.Otherwise this will remain a (well intended) pipe dream.

Don't agree, I think £1000 is a reasonable amount, if you want to collect £100 off ten mates and buy a joint share then why don't you do that. We need to raise a substantial amount of money and unfortunately if you set the level at £100 a lot of people would pledge less. Get down to the Windsor Suite on 26th May if you want to put your thoughts forward. If you don't want to take part then fine but this won't go away even if you think its a pipe dream, believe me this is a very real attempt, we won't go away.

[Sandiway Blue]

Don't agree, I think £1000 is a reasonable amount, if you want to collect £100 off ten mates and buy a joint share then why don't you do that. We need to raise a substantial amount of money and unfortunately if you set the level at £100 a lot of people would pledge less. Get down to the Windsor Suite on 26th May if you want to put your thoughts forward. If you don't want to take part then fine but this won't go away even if you think its a pipe dream, believe me this is a very real attempt, we won't go away.

No way will BRSIT get the amount of money required.I seriously doubt they will get even half way to the target set.

If supporters weren't prepared to pay £420 a season ticket 5 years ago what makes you think they will pay double and some now after one of the worst recessions seen in decades?

It is typical that the likes of Wayne Wild and others who are 'comfortably well off' think that £1,000 is a 'realistic' amount of money for people to part with.

[den]

Sorry Den, you misunderstand how you do risk management, you identify the risk - that the club could fail to find enough funds to run itself; understand the impact if that risk comes to pass - that the club could go into administration; judge the likelihood of that occurring and finally consider what risk you can tolerate. Risk management contains all those elements and in my opinion the levels of wages we were carrying (and the rest of the league for that matter) significantly increased the likelihood of the risk chrystallising into an issue. So some mitigating action was needed and I suggest that any new owner (post Venkys)would do the same. Clubs run on a neutral budget have a habit of surviving.

I'm certain that JW and the trustees knew exactly the risks of running a PL club on our wage levels Roversider. They weren't amateur businessmen. They assessed it with far more info at their fingertips than you and me have, and concluded that to compete at PL level, you had to pay good wages and they thought they could do that. They knew the risk and worked out their strategy brilliantly. Wages differ from month to month at a PL club, so the debt levels differ along with those. When the wages meant higher debt, then the trustees acted. No problems as far as I can see.

I'll ask you again, when you say "So some mitigating action was needed", what figures are you working on - Steve Keans?

[Majiball]

Sorry Den, you misunderstand how you do risk management, you identify the risk - that the club could fail to find enough funds to run itself; understand the impact if that risk comes to pass - that the club could go into administration; judge the likelihood of that occurring and finally consider what risk you can tolerate. Risk management contains all those elements and in my opinion the levels of wages we were carrying (and the rest of the league for that matter) significantly increased the likelihood of the risk chrystallising into an issue. So some mitigating action was needed and I suggest that any new owner (post Venkys)would do the same. Clubs run on a neutral budget have a habit of surviving.

As for the spurious argument of we need to spend those levels to stay in the Premiership then look at the clubs that have stayed up this year in the form of Swansea and Norwich with wage bills c. £20 million less than us (or Bolton). Its true you can spend more as an established Premier club and that is where we have been. Alternatively we could go for broke and win something as Portsmouth did.

We need a change of owners to someone who understands the need to keep the Rovers in good order - if Venkys can transform to that then hoorah! Personally I believe the best way is for BRSIT to move forward, probably in partnership with someone else.

I want a club that my grandchildren can support and if that means we are more akin to Blackpool with some years in the Premier, some years in the Championship and some years lower so what.

The wages to league position table is done over time IE seasons, please don't use 1 season within which the quality has declined massively to back up your arguement.

[PAFELL]

No way will BRSIT get the amount of money required.I seriously doubt they will get even half way to the target set.

If supporters weren't prepared to pay £420 a season ticket 5 years ago what makes you think they will pay double and some now after one of the worst recessions seen in decades?

It is typical that the likes of Wayne Wild and others who are 'comfortably well off' think that £1,000 is a 'realistic' amount of money for people to part with. CORRECT

I think brsit are about 28.5mill short of what venkys want. Long long way to go.

[47er]

I think brsit are about 28.5mill short of what venkys want. Long long way to go.

And there's the added cost of paying out Kean's contract Pafell------remember that suggestion?

[Roversider]

[quote name='den' timestamp='1336822011' post='1262250'

I'll ask you again, when you say "So some mitigating action was needed", what figures are you working on - Steve Keans?

You show your ignorance by linking me to Kean, is that relevant to this discussion?

The figures of wages to turnover percentage are in the public domain.

There are numerous articles on the risks of high percentages, the Football League are using limits to ensure financial stability in League 2. UEFA are attempting to do a similar thing for Champions League. I have spent most of my career involved in finance in big and small companies so I am not totally ignorant of key financial ratios.

There is a direct correlation between overspending on wages and Administration. Selling players is fine so long as the production line works and there is a customer able to pay.

It's all about a balance, I think the balance should be less wages, I don't think that Venkys went about it very well and that is putting it very mildly.

[Clitherover]

And there's the added cost of paying out Kean's contract Pafell------remember that suggestion?

Could he not see out his contract cleaning the loo's at Ewood instead?

[winstonsmith]

the levels of wages at Rovers have been unsustainable unless you get income from selling players or constant injections of cash.

Just a minor point. Obviously, Venkys have decided to cut costs. However, when the takeover happened wasn't it assumed that this would lead to a great increase in turnover by virtue of Rovers inevitable popularity in India.

Whatever happened to all the lovely money which was supposed to flow into Rovers coffers from the sub-continent ? Weren't we supposed to benefit from increased sponsorship deals, shirt sales and the like ? I appreciate that building the brand takes time but have we benefited in any way from this connection ?

[philipl]

These guys are total incompetents.

They are morons at marketing.