[Archived] Transfer Talk

[thenodrog]

I've no idea how, that's down to the experts, but didn't Risedale leave Leeds in 80m debt? They survived after Bates came in, its not a foregone conclusion that the club will fold, in fact history shows it simply will not happen.

Get them out, NOW

Anyway Leeds have a turnover of around 30m pa WITHOUT any parachute payments. Care to speculate what ours is once those payments dry up?

[imy9]

Hull offered £12m last summer, Venky's turned it down, not Shaw and Bowyer. Jordan Rhodes scored another 20 goals this season in a team that doesn't even play to his strengths. Venky's obviously don't feel that finacially they need to sell him. Ergo they aren't going to sell for less than £12m considering he has another 4 years left on his contract. They MIGHT sell him, but it won't be for £6m. C Palace will probably back me up. They tried to get Gestede for £3.5m six months ago and were rightly laughed at. If you pay attention to the hints and indications that come out of the LT (nowadays an official 'partner' of Rovers) you will see that Gestede is valued at closer to £10m by Rovers and if one thing is certain it's that the Venky's won't sell on the cheap (Rhodes, Jones and Gestede have all proved that). I'd imagine they are fuming that King has left for a fraction of what he might be potentially worth if he stays injury free and fulfils his potential at B'mouth.

Based on what we have seen from Venkys this is probably a good assessment.

Also factor in that Rhodes (according to reports) is not the sort of person to demand a transfer, we are probably looking at him being here in August.

We need to play to his strengths or else what is the point of keeping him?

[Damien]

Rhodes depends entirely on quality players behind him. If they go and are replaced by worse as is on the cards then his goals will dry up and his value and wage demands fall. Hardly rocket science is it BR?

But you have reached that conclusion, and so would any manager interested!

People would know he hasn't lost his ability, just the team he is in has!

Anyway, I hope he stays and I'm just being wishful!

No harm in that!

[Gav]

Anyway Leeds have a turnover of around 30m pa WITHOUT any parachute payments. Care to speculate what ours is once those payments dry up?

So Leeds managed it, no top flight club has EVER gone out of existence, but you'd rather stick with Venkys until when? The debt is 500m 600m?

Something wrong with that logic Gordon.

[thenodrog]

More like your logic is flawed Gav. LUFC turnover is closer to 3x ours to service an equivalent debt. That is all the bean counters see.

[Gav]

More like your logic is flawed Gav. LUFC turnover is closer to 3x ours to service an equivalent debt. That is all the bean counters see.

So building more debt is logical then?

How much further into debt do you want us to go? 500m? 800m?

[ABBEY]

what level of debts are you willing to let your new slum buds accrue before you say venkys out Gord?

[blueboy3333]

The oracle has spoken

great contribution. Now if you don't mind the adults are trying to talk, why don't you pop along and draw some more Mr Men.

[ABBEY]

superfan.com

[USABlue]

Yes. Most definitely. Maybe not though if we had paid the going rate for ST's.

Whose daughter? Bill's or Jack's?

Bill.

[joey_big_nose]

The world has moved on since Hull offered a £12m deal for Rhodes last August.

I've maintained recently that Rovers would do well to get a total of £15m including extras for both Rhodes and Gestede.

Even if we sell both Rhodes and Gestede, I very much doubt it would be sufficient to get the FFP embargo lifted.

The bottom line is that Rovers are presently kept alive by the Raos either using their own capital to issue more share capital or personally borrowing money from BOI in order to issue more share capital.

IMV, it can't and wont continue so I fully expect both Rhodes and Gestede plus a couple of others to be sold in order to 'bank roll' next season's losses. Some fans will scoff at the perceived knock down prices but in reality, we are between a rock and a hard place and the macho posturing from Shaw, Bowyer etc about values is precisely just that.

What I find amazing is despite so little of what you ever predict ever being correct you continue to be so forthright.

It's bizarre.

[den]

So Leeds managed it, no top flight club has EVER gone out of existence,

And? What's that got to do with us?

[chaddyrovers]

Derby Telegraph is linking Derby with Rhodes

http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/Derby-County-linked-Jordan-Rhodes-speculation/story-26606195-detail/story.html

[Gav]

And? What's that got to do with us?

Well apparently if Venys leave now we're going bust, out of existence, it's never happened to a side in the top divisions ever, but it's being reserved just for Blackburn Rovers.

So much so that the only option is to keep piling on more and more debt.....Lordy Lordy...

[Mercer]

Hull offered £12m last summer, Venky's turned it down, not Shaw and Bowyer. Jordan Rhodes scored another 20 goals this season in a team that doesn't even play to his strengths. Venky's obviously don't feel that finacially they need to sell him. Ergo they aren't going to sell for less than £12m considering he has another 4 years left on his contract. They MIGHT sell him, but it won't be for £6m. C Palace will probably back me up. They tried to get Gestede for £3.5m six months ago and were rightly laughed at. If you pay attention to the hints and indications that come out of the LT (nowadays an official 'partner' of Rovers) you will see that Gestede is valued at closer to £10m by Rovers and if one thing is certain it's that the Venky's won't sell on the cheap (Rhodes, Jones and Gestede have all proved that). I'd imagine they are fuming that King has left for a fraction of what he might be potentially worth if he stays injury free and fulfils his potential at B'mouth.

As I said, the world has moved on from January.

The Raos will now realise that promotion is most likely a forlorn dream and the cash position is getting increasingly desperate.

I am still of the opinion that if the debt if it is put against the club then we are already beyond the point of no return.

Like being one of these nutty school shooters in the US, once the first victim is dead and you accept that you will save the last bullet for yourself then you may as well kill 50.

The debt is against the club.

It's there in black and white. Rovers' creditors totalled £98 million at June 2014.

Anyway Leeds have a turnover of around 30m pa WITHOUT any parachute payments. Care to speculate what ours is once those payments dry up?

Our 'natural' turnover is about £12million.

[Pedro]

I can't help but think Nicko childishly likes to poke the easily led Rovers fans with a stick at any chance. It's ridiculous that he gets paid for just conjuring up nonsense and has made a living out of it for so long, equally ridiculous that people still stress off his lies.

[Mercer]

What I find amazing is despite so little of what you ever predict ever being correct you continue to be so forthright.

It's bizarre.

I think almost certainly, when something happens regarding Rovers' financial position, it will be like a thunderbolt.

There will be no 'profit warnings' that you see with so many companies eg Tesco.

When it does, don't say you didn't see it coming.

[davulsukur]

It still doesn't explain why they would sell Rhodes for half of the price they know they can get.

Even less so if they are that desperate for cash.

You peddled this same line last summer.

[Damien]

Until rovers can sign anyone (out of embargo) selling both Rhodes and Gestede is suicide.

Regardless of debt, to sell the top players without being able to replace them would cause rovers to sink like a stone.

Keeping one or both players increases the chances of a cup run, promotion push or even a league title.

Yes recent history isn't very good but we need to believe there is a chance of something positive coming.

The club do need to sort out the turnover to expenses ratio but that can be achieved this year with new sponsorships and lower wages!

Losing Dunn, Robbo and who ever else goes lowers outgoings whilst new sponsorships increase incomings.

That will show FFP that we are compliant and this will go some way to rectifying our situation.

Selling anyone who is seen as vital to our promotion is futile and very short sighted!

[Mercer]

It still doesn't explain why they would sell Rhodes for half of the price they know they can get.

Even less so if they are that desperate for cash.

You peddled this same line last summer.

Ok, let's see then how much he goes for.

A player is only worth what some other club will pay.

The world has moved on. £6million for Rhodes plus a couple of million extras is probably as good as it will get.

[chris_h]

I think almost certainly, when something happens regarding Rovers' financial position, it will be like a thunderbolt.

There will be no 'profit warnings' that you see with so many companies eg Tesco.

When it does, don't say you didn't see it coming.

As this is the transfer thread is there any progress on that 'breaking news' story you flagged about the Rovers U21 player moving to the Premiership? It's just that its been a few weeks now since you said that this 'news' would break.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

what level of debts are you willing to let your new slum buds accrue before you say venkys out Gord?

My take has been for a while that we are already beyond the point where the debts are sustainable if the Venky's pull out - so why not chuck a few more million on, we would be b******d either way.

[Damien]

Can anyone explain in lamens terms the actual breakdown of the aforementioned debt?

Everyone appears to be a financial advisor or an accounts expert, I feel rather out of my depth.

I have read reports but everyone seems to be an expert on how we are so screwed.

[Gav]

The debt is against the club.

It's there in black and white. Rovers' creditors totalled £98 million at June 2014.

Ian Battersby said the debt isn't secured against the club, we all heard it on radio Lancashire, why would he tell fibs?

[Mercer]

Ian Battersby said the debt isn't secured against the club, we all heard it on radio Lancashire, why would he tell fibs?

Gav, as I have said on many occasions, it's irrelevant if debt is secured or unsecured.

The problem is if that debt can't be repaid as and when it becomes due it leads to insolvency.

In a nutshell, Rovers' accounts (football club accounts) for year ended June 2014 show:

• Rovers have creditors of £98million
  • £40million is 'external' debt including BOI
  • £58million is owed to parent company VLL - if the Raos get hacked off, Rovers could be history
• BOI reserve the right to take a debenture over Rovers' assets - if this happens, fasten your seatbelts as it would be lock, stock and barrel fixed and floating charges over Rovers' assets

.The land security in India that BOI hold could be for either one or both of the following

• To secure guarantees (for Rovers debt to BOI) provided from the Raos as individuals or from VHPL (Indian company regarded as controlling company of VLL) or indeed from both the Raos and VHPL
• To secure monies that the Raos have borrowed in order to increase issued share capital in VLL (keeps the football club afloat) which I understand has now increased from the £85million shown in accounts of VLL for year ended 31 March 2014 - this would be staggering if correct

I think a lot of fans are under a misapprehension that Venky's are taking all the hits and Rovers are mortgage free and risk free. Nothing could be further than reality.

In a normal default situation, the lender will pursue its monies, interest (including default penalties) and costs directly through the borrower (Rovers' football club). Only when all avenues have been exhausted with the borrower (ultimately at the end of administration or liquidation) will the lender look to enforce its third party guarantees (secured or otherwise).