[Archived] Walker Family Lawsuit V Paul Egerton-Vernon

[VinjayV4]

why bother your a city fan now?

As my signature says don't assume when you don't know the truth. If anyone wants to ask me about that then they can do so via PM or on twitter as long as they do so politely. I've explained to a few people (tomphil for instance) why I came back and also mentioned it in this thread. Can't keep explaining stuff to people over and over again though. A lot of fans have left and hopefully they will eventually return as well.

By the way I've seen you criticised for constantly taking digs at Venkys. Well you're absolutely right.

Sent an email to Egerton-Vernon and had no reply. Not expecting one either.

[yoda]

 

As my signature says don't assume when you don't know the truth. If anyone wants to ask me about that then they can do so via PM or on twitter as long as they do so politely. I've explained to a few people (tomphil for instance) why I came back and also mentioned it in this thread. Can't keep explaining stuff to people over and over again though. A lot of fans have left and hopefully they will eventually return as well.

By the way I've seen you criticised for constantly taking digs at Venkys. Well you're absolutely right.

Sent an email to Egerton-Vernon and had no reply. Not expecting one either.

Have you found out how the trial went yet ?

[Pedro]

That legal claim has nothing to do with Rovers. They'll be happy with the price they were paid for Rovers, the issues sound to be about the unsuccessful business moves ( in terms of financial gain).

[yoda]

That legal claim has nothing to do with Rovers. They'll be happy with the price they were paid for Rovers, the issues sound to be about the unsuccessful business moves ( in terms of financial gain).

Maybe it was just Paul Egerton-Vernon that was happy with the price,

I wonder what the disastrous deals where though

[tomphil]

Selling Rovers then a couple of deals involving their share of the airline in the following years must have netted them about 60 million +. Don't know what they are moaning about unless he went and blew that lot on some poor investments.

[RevidgeBlue]

Maybe it was just Paul Egerton-Vernon that was happy with the price,

I wonder what the disastrous deals where though

I've no idea what they were or where the fault lies in this presumably non Rovers related issue but in general terms Its all very well going after speculative investments hoping for a high rate of return then moaning when they go wrong and hoping to sue the person that introduced you to the opportunity. Like having your cake and eating it.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Wonder if they now look at the astronomical Television money involved and weep.Jack gave them all the tools they needed for continuity of Rovers..the club could/should have been run as a successful family business.

None of them appear as savvy or money wise as the great man himself.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Wonder if they now look at the astronomical Television money involved and weep.

I doubt it as 90% of that extra TV money will end up in the same place it always does, players back pockets.

[RevidgeBlue]

Revidge I certainly think the issue with lack of team funding was far more important than the Riverside. Just that as you're far more respected on here than me it was a useful example of pointing out where one of Jack's wishes was blatantly ignored. Since they ignored that who knows how much else they ignored.

On the lack of funding I completely agree with you.

Going on snippets from John Williams gleaned from various fans forums and employing the benefit of hindsight it's my view that the original hope was that the Club would "wash it's face" financially and the Trust would chip in with an "Andy Cole " from time to time. However it quickly became apparent that at the time the Club could not remain competitive on the pitch and make a profit at the same time and generally the Club made an annual loss generally in the 2-3m range without any marquee signings coming in.

The focus then seemed to change and someone seemingly came up with the idea of the Trust substituting the revenue we would have made if Ewood had been packed out with 30k every week. With the gates as they were at the time it just so happened the figure needed was 3m p.a. It also however became apparent that what the Trust were giving with one hand they expected to take back with the other by selling a Damien Duff from time to time or replacing players sold with cheaper options.

Even this limited level of support appeared to be too much for the Trust after a few years and direct financial support was withdrawn completely. I'm pretty certain this was not what Jack would have wanted and as den said it's a shame no-one had the balls to mount a legal challenge at the time. However if I'd have been employed by the Club earning hundreds of thousands of pounds a year I'm not sure I would have put that job security at risk either and it would have required a private individual of colossal wealth to take the plunge.

And yet despite all that I can see the family's side. If you had no interest in football whatsoever would you want to splurge the family fortune away away on MGP's latest 50k p.w. contract?. I certainly wouldn't but the difference here from every other normal situation was that they should still nonetheless in an ideal world from our point of view have been reluctantly bound by Jack's wishes and the terms of his will and the Trust.

[Exiled in Toronto]

For me it's interesting in that it sheds a bit of light on the relationship between the family and the Trust, which was often muddled up on here. Clearly, it was quite a hands-off relationship.

It also casts the Trustees in a new light in that they may not have been firstly all that good and secondly spending much time at all worrying about the sale process of the club. I was under the impression they were more stewards of Jack's existing investments, now it seems they were gambling with huge chunks of money, with a whiff of perhaps making some investments not with the Trust's beneficiaries interests totally in mind. With all that to keep them occupied and feeding in the trough, passing over the fate of the club to slimeball Anderson probably was a no brainer for them.

[Pedro]

Maybe it was just Paul Egerton-Vernon that was happy with the price,

I wonder what the disastrous deals where though

They flogged BMI didn't they and from memory something else folded?

[pjt]

It reads to me that the beneficiaries (The walker family members stated - only three of them?) were trying to sue the trustees for losing shedloads of cash in an allegedly negligent way, who appear to have not been insured properly (when they should have been), and that the trustees also then refused to resign without payment.

I wish I had a job where I could say "Sorry I have lost you over £100 million, please give me some cash personally and I will then resign and stop loosing you money"

[bob fleming]

I doubt it as 90% of that extra TV money will end up in the same place it always does, players back pockets.

Totally agree with that. However once you are in the top flight and established then you should be able to balance the books and be relatively comfortable (more so after this season when the TV money goes through the roof and even if you do go down you'll have an even greater chance of bouncing straight back*) Rovers were never shy in paying top dollar for managers. Past tense of course, that was entirely ruined when they hired that arsehole Kean. However if anyone thinks they can make money by owning a football club they really are in cloud cuckoo land.

BTW - didn't the Walkers put millions in - or am I imagining things? Wasn't the total debt a mere £20m when they sold the club? The assorted feckwits who ran the club at the time - some of whom are still at large - saw fit ro write off the best part of that figure with the signings of Best and Ethutu. Genius. And yes, I do fully appreciate that it was poor Derek's first day in the job when he signed one of them (I can't remember which one now - they're both in that part of my brain I try not to visit very often labelled "bad stuff")

(* in theory - mad things happen - as we well know only too well)

[RevidgeBlue]

Jack put millions in Bob, about 120m by my reckoning. Not so sure the Trust's net contribution was that significant after taking the sales of the likes of Duff, Dunn, Bentley, RSC, Warnock and 23 m sale proceeds into account. That's about 81m there if my maths is correct.

[47er]

It reads to me that the beneficiaries (The walker family members stated - only three of them?) were trying to sue the trustees for losing shedloads of cash in an allegedly negligent way, who appear to have not been insured properly (when they should have been), and that the trustees also then refused to resign without payment.

I wish I had a job where I could say "Sorry I have lost you over £100 million, please give me some cash personally and I will then resign and stop loosing you money"

Then you should join the Finance Industry!

[Leonard Venkhater]

Wonder if they now look at the astronomical Television money involved and weep.Jack gave them all the tools they needed for continuity of Rovers..the club could/should have been run as a successful family business.

None of them appear as savvy or money wise as the great man himself.

What other family does that bring to mind?

[47er]

On the lack of funding I completely agree with you.

Going on snippets from John Williams gleaned from various fans forums and employing the benefit of hindsight it's my view that the original hope was that the Club would "wash it's face" financially and the Trust would chip in with an "Andy Cole " from time to time. However it quickly became apparent that at the time the Club could not remain competitive on the pitch and make a profit at the same time and generally the Club made an annual loss generally in the 2-3m range without any marquee signings coming in.

The focus then seemed to change and someone seemingly came up with the idea of the Trust substituting the revenue we would have made if Ewood had been packed out with 30k every week. With the gates as they were at the time it just so happened the figure needed was 3m p.a. It also however became apparent that what the Trust were giving with one hand they expected to take back with the other by selling a Damien Duff from time to time or replacing players sold with cheaper options.

Even this limited level of support appeared to be too much for the Trust after a few years and direct financial support was withdrawn completely. I'm pretty certain this was not what Jack would have wanted and as den said it's a shame no-one had the balls to mount a legal challenge at the time. However if I'd have been employed by the Club earning hundreds of thousands of pounds a year I'm not sure I would have put that job security at risk either and it would have required a private individual of colossal wealth to take the plunge.

And yet despite all that I can see the family's side. If you had no interest in football whatsoever would you want to splurge the family fortune away away on MGP's latest 50k p.w. contract?. I certainly wouldn't but the difference here from every other normal situation was that they should still nonetheless in an ideal world from our point of view have been reluctantly bound by Jack's wishes and the terms of his will and the Trust.

Not so. it was Jack who introduced the 3m a year subsidy, in his words to compensate for the lower crowds we got from being a smallish town.

The Trust abolished it, reintroduced it briefly and then abolished it again.

[JHRover]

It really is staggering that a supposedly well run and financially astute club like Rovers could really have been a loss making enterprise.

A member of the richest league in the world for ten years straight.

Left debt free by Jack Walker when he died.

All infrastructure already in place. Next to no investment in Ewood Park or Brockhall other than general upkeep and minor improvements.

No significant transfer expenditure. Certainly after Souness left Hughes, Ince and Allardyce had very limited transfer resources, wages and often lost their better players to rivals as a way of generating funds.

For 5-6 years Rovers were midtable in the richest league in the world, continually sold its best players, adhered to a relatively small wage structure, limited or no investment in the stadium or training ground, yet still racked up a £20 million bank debt and managed to post annual losses.

That takes some doing. Attendances are virtually irrelevant in Premier League terms. Dave Whelan said he could make season tickets free and it wouldn't make much difference with the TV money on offer.

I'm sure that the likes of Swansea and Watford won't be going into a similar financial situation during their Premier league spells. There is money to be made, that's why businessmen get involved in this sport. We just managed to find a way of not doing.

[bob fleming]

Jack put millions in Bob, about 120m by my reckoning. Not so sure the Trust's net contribution was that significant after taking the sales of the likes of Duff, Dunn, Bentley, RSC, Warnock and 23 m sale proceeds into account. That's about 81m there if my maths is correct.

And the signings, the wages? The share issues writing off large amounts of debt post Jacks death?

Anyway, I believe this is all in the accounts. I don't want to derail Vinjays thread.

[Pedro]

Jack put millions in Bob, about 120m by my reckoning. Not so sure the Trust's net contribution was that significant after taking the sales of the likes of Duff, Dunn, Bentley, RSC, Warnock and 23 m sale proceeds into account. That's about 81m there if my maths is correct.

There was a stat a few years back that said that we won the league and had a stadium built and the effective cost was £1.5million to Jack. This took into consideration the fact that we made massive profits on players such as Shearer, Sutton, Le Saux, Berg, Hendry, Batty, Sherwood etc.

I've never checked it myself and it can't possibly factor in wage outlay but it does show (despite what some fans may pretend otherwise) that we always were a selling club. This wasn't Jack's choice, I'd argue. It's mainly down to the fact we weren't a truly big club and the majority only ever played for us for the money or when Kenny was manager.

We do pick and choose stats though and beat certain entities with the same stick that we'd tickle another with.

[47er]

Vinjay's thread was derailed from the second he introduced it as the "smoking gun" re neglect of Rovers. In fact its a civil matter between some benficiaries of the Walker Trust and the administrators of that Trust in which No-ONE who does not belong to either of those groups has any legal standing at all.

Not Seneca, not Brag, not anyone.

Its become thread to have a good moan at what went wrong, and to attack or defend the Walkers and the Trust.

Nothing wrong with that, my feelings about the behaviour of the Walker Family towards the Club are well known and if more people come round to that point of view that's OK by me.

However, you cannot derail this thread, it was never on track.

[RevidgeBlue]

Signings and wages would have been incorporated in the annual losses. I've no doubt significant paper losses were also written off but I assume that would primarily have been money technically owing to Jack for investment pumped in while he was alive but which was not intended to be repaid. Not losses racked up by the Trust after his death.

[tomphil]

They seemed to use a big sale every now and again to keep the overdraft in check. When it was heading for 20 mill the bankers probably starting getting twitchy so a big sale to pay a chunk down and reinvest a bob or two was the way they did it. Even that model was catching up in the end.

They knew that sooner rather than later they'd have had to whack a large sum in again or overtake a large cost cutting exercise themselves. Enter the rogue agent.

[Pedro]

They seemed to use a big sale every now and again to keep the overdraft in check. When it was heading for 20 mill the bankers probably starting getting twitchy so a big sale to pay a chunk down and reinvest a bob or two was the way they did it. Even that model was catching up in the end.

They knew that sooner rather than later they'd have had to whack a large sum in again or overtake a large cost cutting exercise themselves. Enter the rogue agent.

If only they'd left the annual donation alone as surely was Jacks wishes then things may not have got so desperate.

If we'd stuck with Sam or replaced him with someone worthy, we always had Jones to cash in on to balance the books. The Walkers had no real interest in us and in my opinion, just cashed us in like many families cash in the heirlooms.

[VinjayV4]

If we'd stuck with Sam or replaced him with someone worthy, we always had Jones to cash in on to balance the books. The Walkers had no real interest in us and in my opinion, just cashed us in like many families cash in the heirlooms.

BFS wanted to leave in 2010. Williams didn't appoint Souness. He did appoint Hughes (who came highest in fan votes) perhaps with board consultation as well. Might have appointed BFS in summer 2008 but if the ironic fans petition prevented that I can't recall. BFS perhaps pulled himself out of the running. Williams appointed Ince to a mixed reaction after going for the populist vote (as he did with Hughes) in Shearer. My feelings are Shearer would have been just as disastrous. While BFS was never my long term preference (though he is a competent manager) I certainly wouldn't have told Venkys to appoint Steve Kean! Eventually Saint John would have got another badly wrong or retired. Relegation was inevitable with the "trust" in charge. Maybe even if BFS stayed despite the intelligence insulting notion he's incapable of being relegated. Brian Clough suffered relegation.

I'm sure that the likes of Swansea and Watford won't be going into a similar financial situation during their Premier league spells. There is money to be made, that's why businessmen get involved in this sport. We just managed to find a way of not doing.

Venkys stated after completing the takeover they intended to establish Rovers as a truly global brand. Egerton-Vernon spoke of international investment and the EPL global appeal. During the reign of Williams people such as myself spoke of global marketing. I referred to the marketing approach (and have to use the word) as parochial. Not to mention mistakes made such as the Sports World debacle.

Venkys failed in establishing Rovers as a truly global brand for 2 reasons.

1. Relegation.

2. They are idiots who turned local sponsors against the club never mind global.

Presumably their idea of global marketing was to produce a chicken commercial featuring Rovers players and a game against a terrible Indian side. Venkys made an apparent effort to hire Maradona. In a remarkable coincidence someone else suggested Maradona shortly before Venkys took over and they probably hadn't come up with the idea themselves at that point. It would have been globally sensational but didn't happen. The only global attention Venkys have gained outside India is as an absolute laughing stock in Britain.

Even this limited level of support appeared to be too much for the Trust after a few years and direct financial support was withdrawn completely. I'm pretty certain this was not what Jack would have wanted and as den said it's a shame no-one had the balls to mount a legal challenge at the time. However if I'd have been employed by the Club earning hundreds of thousands of pounds a year I'm not sure I would have put that job security at risk either and it would have required a private individual of colossal wealth to take the plunge.

100% certain. Nobody considered a legal challenge never mind had the balls. All what happened was more and more people agreed the club needed to be sold. Those who called for fans to pressure the family against the trust were ignored. Williams did not stand up to them despite clearly admitting they had broken wishes. Williams no longer had the free reign as under the trust and soon after Venkys took over he left the club in spite of his six figure salary. Finn and Goodman did not stand up to them either and probably did not wish to make a legal challenge themselves. However resignation could have been an option for Williams, Finn and Goodman under the trustees.

The only hope legally then and now may have been Seneca. Wayne Wild was shocked on twitter by the 127 million figure in the lawsuit but did not respond to my other tweets about Seneca attempting some kind of action.. The only other option would be to shame the Walker family into taking action if there were any charges to be brought against the trustees. Unfortunately they seem comfortable swanning around the area (or on numerous luxurious holidays) and have not faced any public abuse or boycott of their businesses. Howard Walker's despicable attitude should have been widespread knowledge in the town.

For me it's interesting in that it sheds a bit of light on the relationship between the family and the Trust, which was often muddled up on here. Clearly, it was quite a hands-off relationship.

It also casts the Trustees in a new light in that they may not have been firstly all that good and secondly spending much time at all worrying about the sale process of the club. I was under the impression they were more stewards of Jack's existing investments, now it seems they were gambling with huge chunks of money, with a whiff of perhaps making some investments not with the Trust's beneficiaries interests totally in mind. With all that to keep them occupied and feeding in the trough, passing over the fate of the club to slimeball Anderson probably was a no brainer for them.

DAMN RIGHT!