[Archived] Transfers Part 2

[davulsukur]

2 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

We got relegated because Coyle decided to replace Duffy and Hanley with Greer and Brown. In fairness his hands were tied with regards transfer fees, but he could have undoubtedly signed 2 better centre halves. Signing 2 36 year olds was asking for trouble. Plus the fact he is a dreadful manager who not only seemed to not train defenders, but he somehow actually made them worse..

I hope we do spend a bit, but if we keep signing players like Whittingham, I don't care how we get them. 

You'll get no complaints from me that Coyoe was horrendously poor at his job.

 

You've just backed up my point when talking about the centre backs. 

[AdamRochina]

I wake up to like 20 plus new posts and im like holy @#/? we might have signed someone. .3 days in a row ive fallen for that! ?

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, AdamRochina said:

I wake up to like 20 plus new posts and im like holy @#/? we might have signed someone. .3 days in a row ive fallen for that! ?

Id say all of our new signings will get their own thread. Thats desperate we are!

[Norbert Rassragr]

Nah, just the usual vendettas Adam. One day we'll sign another player, and then the handbags will have a different tone for a few hours.

[JacknOry]

16 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

So no transfer news or links today guys and ladies? 

That's your job - stop skiving.

[Sparks Rover]

8 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Id say all of our new signings will get their own thread. Thats desperate we are!

Not to mention the splash across the rovers website like we've signed Messi.  Whittingham is like a messiah according to rovers website....

[Stuart]

1 hour ago, Biz said:

Boast?

No boast, I just can't join in with the same wallowing about intention. Why would anyone want to burn money? Unless we've established some evidence, I'll refrain from joining in with the "tomphil"esq discussions of BRFCS.

It's always been quite obvious (to me at least) that our predominant issues are the conflict of interests between agents and owners. Long term damage done by giving someone in bed with the agents the key to the safe.

We don't actually know that they've lost any money. Their share price always seems buoyant and they don't seem to have written off the debt yet.

There has to be a financial advantage for them to own us - or they wouldn't.

[AllRoverAsia]

Previously on this MB it has been said that Mrs D is not longer involved.

The Rovers site says:

"The ultimate owners are Mrs Anuradha Jitendra Desai, Mr Banda Venkatesh Rao and Mr Banda Balaji Rao"

The full wording is here:

https://www.rovers.co.uk/contact-us/

So is she still influential in our running demise.

[AAK]

Where is Mercer these days?

At least he gives odds on the daily bullshit that's posted!

Aka Rhodes is signing for Bolton tomoz, put your money on it! 25,000 to 1 do it

[JBiz]

1 hour ago, Stuart said:

We don't actually know that they've lost any money. Their share price always seems buoyant and they don't seem to have written off the debt yet.

There has to be a financial advantage for them to own us - or they wouldn't.

They've* aka us, our, the club.

I agree that we are talking probably a drop in the ocean for them, but again that doesn't add any weight to them buying us to lower our stature purposely! 

Prefer to work in facts as opposed to speculation Stuart, call me old fashioned. A good analogy for their time as owners; they replaced the "crook" with Shebby Singh, the literal joker in the pack.

If that's a master plan to lose millions, you have to say they are absolute geniuses, as opposed to what they actually are; criminally negligent, posh idiots. Sold a dream by a con man.

Summer is such a stagnant discussion obv...!

[Stuart]

Just now, Biz said:

They've* aka us, our, the club.

I agree that we are talking probably a drop in the ocean for them, but again that doesn't add any weight to them buying us to lower our stature purposely! 

Prefer to work in facts as opposed to speculation Stuart, call me old fashioned. A good analogy for their time as owners; they replaced the "crook" with Shebby Singh, the literal joker in the pack.

If that's a master plan to lose millions, you have to say they are absolute geniuses, as opposed to what they actually are; criminally negligent, posh idiots. Sold a dream by a con man.

Summer is such a stagnant discussion obv...!

How have they lost millions? The net result of expenses vs player sales and parachute payments is all debt as far as we can tell.

[JBiz]

Just now, Stuart said:

How have they lost millions? The net result of expenses vs player sales and parachute payments is all debt as far as we can tell.

They've lost millions covering the wages, even selling 10m of players last season left 15m of wages, and we both know the turnover isn't anywhere near that.

The club was relegated with a 50m wage bill. The sale of players over 6/7 years in no way covers the wage to turnover ratio, the pay offs et al.

If we'd been pragmatic upon relegation, instead of shelling 150k a week on Etuhu, Murphy, Best, Rhodes, etc then I might feel the hole is fabricated but the expenditure is in plain sight.

Thats not making excuses either. Their sheer neglect allowed this to happen. I bet the manager pay offs in that time dwarfs the sale of Rhodes, Hanley and Duffy combined.

[Stuart]

Just now, Biz said:

They've lost millions covering the wages, even selling 10m of players last season left 15m of wages, and we both know the turnover isn't anywhere near that.

The club was relegated with a 50m wage bill. The sale of players over 6/7 years in no way covers the wage to turnover ratio, the pay offs et al.

If we'd been pragmatic upon relegation, instead of shelling 150k a week on Etuhu, Murphy, Best, Rhodes, etc then I might feel the hole is fabricated but the expenditure is in plain sight.

Thats not making excuses either. Their sheer neglect allowed this to happen. I bet the manager pay offs in that time dwarfs the sale of Rhodes, Hanley and Duffy combined.

Debt. If the Raos had really lost money we would have none.

[tomphil]

Their books absorb the annual losses and they are happy with that especially as it's now being reigned under control. It's like banging a head against a brick wall but at the risk of upsetting Mr Candyfloss i'll say it again THEY SEEM HAPPY LOSING MONEY ON PAPER it is a loss leader accounting tool for them nothing more nothing less and they personally and their company don't feel the squeeze one bit. Therefore they couldn't give a stuff about club/team/fans what more god damn evidence do you need of that.

God knows how their bank feel about it all but they must be happy to go along with it seeing as borrowings are secured on Indian assets and they'll not call them in unless the whole Corp is going to the wall because the turnover is there and they are getting their interest.

You'd have to be a real geek to actually think they keep sticking in 5/10/15 million pounds out of their own personal pockets to keep this mess going down down down year on year without getting any benefit whatsoever.

Personal pride my arse.

[JBiz]

Do we understand basic economics? If the debt was secured on BRFC's assets alone, we'd be talking 50x the value already.

Why do they want to rack up debt on something they are accountable for? I know it doesn't fit the story you both want to believe, but seriously what is the benefit to them that I see too stupid to see?

The answer is speculative. 

[tomphil]

It's all speculative but you've got to understand how big business works to have an idea where some are coming from. They themselves aren't losing money out of their pockets that's the point it's all numbers crunched on paper and if and of course it is IF they want to syphon money from the main corp whilst avoiding tax as well maybe then what better way to do it ?

Not even illegal if done correctly just standard business practise for some huge companies, keep the money moving. They aren't going out to purposely lose hard cash but they don't care if the books show 10 million per season losses because it's coming in ten fold from other areas. Rovers is a money pit but sadly the way it's run non of it touches the sides but they don't give a toss.

[joey_big_nose]

Just now, Biz said:

Do we understand basic economics? If the debt was secured on BRFC's assets alone, we'd be talking 50x the value already.

Why do they want to rack up debt on something they are accountable for? I know it doesn't fit the story you both want to believe, but seriously what is the benefit to them that I see too stupid to see?

The answer is speculative. 

I think this has been pretty well explained. The huge liability of rovers only becomes material to Venkys when they either sell off the club or write it down on the books. Until that point the massive loans to the club remain assets, ludicrous as it sounds, on the balance sheet.

It's just a case of putting it off. From their point of view they may as well keep on loaning to the club in the hope we get promoted back to the prem, income becomes huge again and they can recover the loans.

[tomphil]

You can tell it's all @#/? anyway because they've never put cash in for transfers as far as we can tell. Possible exception when Bowyer went over there and got about 2 mill to spend but that was probably claimed back from the sales of some of those players, with interest. No problem with that really but why did they never follow it up again ?

Rhodes was paid for in instalments on the clubs books so all in all they've never paid anything out for transfer that hasn't come back in. What they have done of course is under write the annual losses but as said wherever that actual cash comes from the losses are on paper being absorbed by the company books by the looks of it and there has to be big accounting advantages to that.

If the main group of companies and umbrella companies had really been really struggling they'd drop Rovers like a hot stone !

[chaddyrovers]

.

[EgyptianPete]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

.

So much for transfer news, open another thread if all you lot want to do is pontificate about the Raos having money, losing it or whatever, A transfer thread is for transfers for goodness sake, going over old ground is just pointless.

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, EgyptianPete said:

So much for transfer news, open another thread if all you lot want to do is pontificate about the Raos having money, losing it or whatever, A transfer thread is for transfers for goodness sake, going over old ground is just pointless.

I posted a tweet from twitter but after re reading the account it was from I didn't trust the source so had to deleted it

[EgyptianPete]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

I posted a tweet from twitter but after re reading the account it was from I didn't trust the source so had to deleted it

Not on about you mate, no worries, just the same rumblings as usual

[AdamRochina]

What did the tweet say chaddy

[mcflash]

I'm no expert on big business but I'd imagine that they are writing off any loss against taxes. In the meantime they are very likely contributing to the losses by paying themselves a nice wage as directors of the club.

So basically all the money the pump in gets written off and then the earnings they make as directors is free money outside of the country they get taxed in.

[Butty]

18 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

But no truth in the story so take a chill pill, calm down and sit down please

I was chilled when i wrote that reply but WOW you patronising kean Chaddy Where i'm from if you talk too people like that you get chinned mate simple as. I'm not even going to try and humour you anymore I really cannot be bothered with your constant delusional bullsh*t. You're going on ignore Chadster my son.