Venkys - Welcome or Not?

[AllRoverAsia]

3 hours ago, Jimbobololo said:

Good god.

I believe so.

They can ask Him for forgiveness. They will get feck all from me.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

This Circus could go on for decades to come,it really is a gut wrenching awful prospect.

Ewood rots and the debt grows.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

On 24/01/2020 at 17:09, Stuart said:

A drug addict originally had a choice.

We are the victim of a car crash and now being kept on life support, funded by the rich driver’s credit card.

A better analogy is we're all passengers on that aircraft that the co-pilot locked out the senior pilot and then set the automatic pilot to fly the plane into the ground.

[PLJPB]

On 25/01/2020 at 17:01, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

This Circus could go on for decades to come,it really is a gut wrenching awful prospect.

Ewood rots and the debt grows.

It certainly does.

Another share issue of £5.334 million on 23rd January making a staggering total of £180 million spent by Venky's on their 'hobby'.

 

[lraC]

Whoever can make sense of all this is a better man than me. Who in their right mind would do this?

[Kamy100]

I believe that they have to make regular cash injections into the club, these were part of the gurantees that they have to give in order to get auditors to sign off accounts, this is likely to be one of those payments.

[toogs]

10 hours ago, Kamy100 said:

I believe that they have to make regular cash injections into the club, these were part of the gurantees that they have to give in order to get auditors to sign off accounts, this is likely to be one of those payments.

Is there a conflict between what the auditors want, and what the football authorities want in terms of applying with FFP?

Or put another way, does FFP in any way influence the actions of the account auditors?

 

 

[Kamy100]

I am not sure about that, but the way it is explained to me by someone who know understands annual accounting processes is that auditors asked for these funding guarantees as a condition of them approving the accounts.

[Mashed Potatoes]

1 hour ago, toogs said:

Is there a conflict between what the auditors want, and what the football authorities want in terms of applying with FFP?

Or put another way, does FFP in any way influence the actions of the account auditors?

 

 

The auditors have to audit the accounts in line with the law and accounting standards and FFP does not override that. Despite FFP the owners can put as much money as they like in to the club; the FFP constraints are on what can be lost.

[tomphil]

On 23/01/2020 at 17:03, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

Fecking Shabby Singh...how the hell did this come to pass?

I'm never going to stick up for Steve Kean but my god it sounds obvious now that Singh did his fair share of damage to the books in his brief stint.

Danny Fooking Murphy !!!

[lraC]

1 hour ago, Kamy100 said:

I am not sure about that, but the way it is explained to me by someone who know understands annual accounting processes is that auditors asked for these funding guarantees as a condition of them approving the accounts.

The auditors will have looked at the expected income and the continuing liabilities and pointed out in no uncertain terms, that unless the owners funded the shortfall, the business was unsustainable, or in other words, we are bust.

They have obviously agreed to carry on funding it, otherwise, we would now know the we were in administration. If you apply logic to this, knowing that they are never going to get their money back, should mean that they didn't agree to continue to fund is and allow the administration to happen. There is a reason somewhere though that they continue to do so, why though, is anyone's guess. 

[tomphil]

I just think they have a method of filtering a few quid elsewhere whilst obviously propping up the club. Not saying it's dodgy i'm pretty sure now if anything was it would have flagged up.  Just a huge business and owning the club has come in as a handy accounting tool, they can afford it it's their money pit but they really aren't going to keep pouring it down a black hole with no reason whatosever other than pride. There'll be something else in the mix somewhere never obvious to the naked eye.

If it was just a case of we have to fund it or it'll go bust i think there'd have been continuing cuts to a far more sustainable model and we'd be in league 2 now.  However i think pretty soon whether it's FFP or their bankers there'll have to be a big clawback again to balance the books i think it's inevitable. 

That's in the short term though but long term one of three things is likely to happen.

A family fall out, death, illness or a harsh financial period = Bolton scenario.

They'll plod on as it is and out of the blue will just get it all right and up we go, briefly.

Settle for being forever where we are whilst they fund it, mostly ignore it and let others run it to their own tune.

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by tomphil

[Miller11]

Venky’s own 99.9% of Blackburn Rovers. Those shares equate to a value of £180 million on their books.

£20 million a year is chicken feed, pun intended, to them. Putting in this money presents no problem whatsoever. Their core business interests are doing very nicely, their wealth is growing. If they throw another 20 million a year at it for the next ten years, all that means is their club is now valued at £280 million. It’s not like they need the cash for anything else. Balaji will still be able to buy loads of flash motors, and Madame can have all her taps done out in solid gold. 
 

Liquidating the club and writing off the “investment” can’t be a viable option at the moment. They’d wipe the best part of £200 million off their net worth overnight. They don’t need to worry about money, they are concerned with their massive wealth.

Obviously it’s not sustainable indefinitely. But I don’t think we are anywhere near that point. Promotion would give them one exit strategy. The other option I suppose is the very very long game, which they seem totally ill equipped for, and would be miserable for us. Cutting their losses would be a very drastic last resort. I don’t think even they have the slightest inkling into what their long term plan for the club is.

[JacknOry]

Balaji's bra's?

[Stuart]

9 hours ago, tomphil said:

I'm never going to stick up for Steve Kean but my god it sounds obvious now that Singh did his fair share of damage to the books in his brief stint.

Danny Fooking Murphy !!!

The whole boardroom in-fighting was the issue.

Just think of Singh hadn’t come in. Kean might still be here!

[Proudtobeblue&white]

6 hours ago, Miller11 said:

Venky’s own 99.9% of Blackburn Rovers. Those shares equate to a value of £180 million on their books.

£20 million a year is chicken feed, pun intended, to them. Putting in this money presents no problem whatsoever. Their core business interests are doing very nicely, their wealth is growing. If they throw another 20 million a year at it for the next ten years, all that means is their club is now valued at £280 million. It’s not like they need the cash for anything else. Balaji will still be able to buy loads of flash motors, and Madame can have all her taps done out in solid gold. 
 

Liquidating the club and writing off the “investment” can’t be a viable option at the moment. They’d wipe the best part of £200 million off their net worth overnight. They don’t need to worry about money, they are concerned with their massive wealth.

Obviously it’s not sustainable indefinitely. But I don’t think we are anywhere near that point. Promotion would give them one exit strategy. The other option I suppose is the very very long game, which they seem totally ill equipped for, and would be miserable for us. Cutting their losses would be a very drastic last resort. I don’t think even they have the slightest inkling into what their long term plan for the club is.

I like your post and get all of it. But why not go for the Holy Grail and appoint a top manager and proper people to achieve it, instead of languishing in Championship mid-table with TM  and fuck all infrastructure? £20m a year loss making business with no benefits. Doesn't sit well with the rest of their Empire. Yet a large number of our fan's are grateful. I'm not one of them.

[Miller11]

Just now, Proudtobeblue&white said:

I like your post and get all of it. But why not go for the Holy Grail and appoint a top manager and proper people to achieve it, instead of languishing in Championship mid-table with TM  and fuck all infrastructure? £20m a year loss making business with no benefits. Doesn't sit well with the rest of their Empire. Yet a large number of our fan's are grateful. I'm not one of them.

I believe I have the answer to this, and it’s not a pleasant one.

[Stuart]

Just now, Miller11 said:

I believe I have the answer to this, and it’s not a pleasant one.

Following...

[Proudtobeblue&white]

1 minute ago, Miller11 said:

I believe I have the answer to this, and it’s not a pleasant one.

Do share!

[Leonard Venkhater]

4 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

I believe I have the answer to this, and it’s not a pleasant one.

A QM Production...See next week's episode .....

[Proudtobeblue&white]

1 hour ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

A QM Production...See next week's episode .....

God, we are at an age! I was in court yesterday and saw that Nichols Parsons had passed. Mentioned to a thirty year old who had no idea who he was. A Quinn Martin I presume!

Edited January 29, 2020 by Proudtobeblue&white

[rigger]

11 hours ago, Proudtobeblue&white said:

God, we are at an age! I was in court yesterday and saw that Nichols Parsons had passed. Mentioned to a thirty year old who had no idea who he was. A Quinn Martin I presume!

same time, same place. 

[Miller11]

 

Tony Mowbray, Owen Coyle and Paul Lambert are all represented by HSH.

HSH has three directors listed with companies house, namely, Stephen Horner, Dave Sheron, and Craig Honeyman.

 

Honeyman is a former director of SEM. Horner and Sheron are both former SEM employees and were named alongside Jerome Anderson in a lawsuit brought about by Gavin McCann, which suggests they work together closely.

 

Why are these people still having significant influence in the running of the club, if Venky’s have ‘learnt their lesson’?

[tomphil]

And what of shadowman with similar links ?

He's the common denominator in all this, does he get his bosses to throw his old pals a bone still or does their influence remain something more ? 

Either way anybody who got Owen Coyle through the door shouldn't be trusted.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Miller11 said:

 

Tony Mowbray, Owen Coyle and Paul Lambert are all represented by HSH.

HSH has three directors listed with companies house, namely, Stephen Horner, Dave Sheron, and Craig Honeyman.

 

Honeyman is a former director of SEM. Horner and Sheron are both former SEM employees and were named alongside Jerome Anderson in a lawsuit brought about by Gavin McCann, which suggests they work together closely.

 

Why are these people still having significant influence in the running of the club, if Venky’s have ‘learnt their lesson’?

 

Shocker he’s a Boro fan!