Summer Transfer Window

[Herbie6590]

46 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Always looked to me like the VH group pays the bills out of it's monthly turnover that's why i'm convinced it helps with their tax bill or something.

Also been told by a few on here better placed that there have been whats looked like personal funds injected once or twice.

Personally my hunch is the parent company guarantees the running costs and occasionally person funds might be injected to buy the odd 'investment' type player. That's why there aren't many of them and they have to fit certain critera so the 'investors' have a chance of getting it back with a cherry on top.

The trading debts accrue in the BRFC company & BRFC's parent VLL converts a large portion of the debt into shares every year. It is pretty much what happened when JW owned Rovers. Ultimately, funds come from the group companies but arguably, the directors of the parent (i.e. the Raos) could take out lower dividends to allow funds to trickle down thus indirectly funding the group.

If BRFC makes profit on an "investment" player, it needs a smaller handout from the parent.

[frosty]

Yeah, Cunningham looked decent and was without doubt better than Bell and Williams both going forward and defensively. Far more complete full back. His injury was really unfortunate.

That said I don't think we'd have finished much (or any) higher even if he'd have stayed fit. We were still our soft-centered selves once we'd had a couple of wins taking us near the dizzy heights of the top 6 - as evidenced by our last three games with Cunningham in the side, which yielded just one point (he went off injured in the third of those games, QPR, but we'd already shipped two or three by then). We'll always be like that under Mowbray regardless of personnel IMO.

Edited August 15, 2020 by frosty

[JHRover]

2 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

The Raos income comes from their business.
BRFC & VLL (Rovers immediate parent) are part of the Venky’s group. 

Yes I know that but then if these people are billionaires they will have assets and funds at their fingertips that they could use to fund transfers at the club. 

The suggestion seems to be that because of Covid 19 and the apparent downturn in their core business this instantly means there is less money or even no money available for business here. 

I'm not sure why. If they really wanted to fund transfers surely they could use their personal funds rather than company profits. 

Abramovich has apparently lost a fortune recently with the downturn in the value of gold. Yet he has continued to fund substantial business at Chelsea this summer.

There's an argument to be had that those owners with the clout to withstand the Covid dip have an opportunity here to gain an advantage when other clubs not blessed with rich owners might be struggling.

It is also potentially very short-sighted and poor business indeed to insist on a sell to buy policy in our position. There isn't the time nor the market to attract good bids and then put funds to good use on new players.

I'm sure Marinakis at Forest has struggled for business recently with the lockdown yet they've signed a few players.

Edited August 15, 2020 by JHRover

[AAK]

Just watching the promotion game at Preston back in 2001. Wow we had some warriors back then, but warriors who were talented too! Even the likes of duff and Dunn flying in with challenges and looking mean. We really could do with a Gary Flitcroft type leader these days, I forgot how good he actually was, quality player. 

[LDRover]

3 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

Yes I am qualified to discuss grounds. Why do you want Venkys thrown out of football ?

Why do you only ever appear on here to respond to criticism against them or Mowbray?

[simongarnerisgod]

40 minutes ago, AAK said:

Just watching the promotion game at Preston back in 2001. Wow we had some warriors back then, but warriors who were talented too! Even the likes of duff and Dunn flying in with challenges and looking mean. We really could do with a Gary Flitcroft type leader these days, I forgot how good he actually was, quality player. 

100% effort was mandatory in a souness side and flitcroft was a perfect advocate for this,he did a lot of graft for others,the rabble of this squad  would have lasted about a day with souness and flitcroft behind the scenes,can you imagine souness dealing with brereton??

[RovingRover]

3 hours ago, Hasta said:

I seem to be in the minority, but I didn't thng that much of Cunningham when he was here. If the bar is 'are they better then Bell and Del' then it's a pretty low standard.

He was adequate. Adequate only gets you so far.

In other news I heard on the grapevine that Rovers might be interested in Conor Gallagher on loan from Chelsea.

[unsall]

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

Yes I know that but then if these people are billionaires they will have assets and funds at their fingertips that they could use to fund transfers at the club. 

The suggestion seems to be that because of Covid 19 and the apparent downturn in their core business this instantly means there is less money or even no money available for business here. 

I'm not sure why. If they really wanted to fund transfers surely they could use their personal funds rather than company profits. 

Abramovich has apparently lost a fortune recently with the downturn in the value of gold. Yet he has continued to fund substantial business at Chelsea this summer.

There's an argument to be had that those owners with the clout to withstand the Covid dip have an opportunity here to gain an advantage when other clubs not blessed with rich owners might be struggling.

It is also potentially very short-sighted and poor business indeed to insist on a sell to buy policy in our position. There isn't the time nor the market to attract good bids and then put funds to good use on new players.

I'm sure Marinakis at Forest has struggled for business recently with the lockdown yet they've signed a few players.

Not sure you can compare Venkys with Abramovich who is obviously a multi billionaire, everyone can see that every year on the rich list. Not sure anybody seen the Venkys in any rich list, obviously they are wealthy and could very well be billionaires but no one knows.

All companies have been affected with coved 19, massively, and not sure they are just going to put millions into Rovers when they have many firms to sort out, be nice for us if they would, but think it’s going to be a bit tighter this season till things get back to normal.

Hopefully some sort of budget but if we have to wheel and deal, so be it, as long as they keep  chucking in a few quid to keep us going day to day, we will have to put up with it, because I don’t think there is anybody out there to buy us with pots of cash.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

42 minutes ago, simongarnerisgod said:

100% effort was mandatory in a souness side and flitcroft was a perfect advocate for this,he did a lot of graft for others,the rabble of this squad  would have lasted about a day with souness and flitcroft behind the scenes,can you imagine souness dealing with brereton??

Can you see Souness signing him ?

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

The trading debts accrue in the BRFC company & BRFC's parent VLL converts a large portion of the debt into shares every year. It is pretty much what happened when JW owned Rovers. Ultimately, funds come from the group companies but arguably, the directors of the parent (i.e. the Raos) could take out lower dividends to allow funds to trickle down thus indirectly funding the group.

If BRFC makes profit on an "investment" player, it needs a smaller handout from the parent.

Interesting stuff, cheers for that.

Wonder what happened to that 3 million or whatever it was that went out of Vll to fund an Akon venture ?

I think there's a few ways that could be cooked up to get a few quid back out again.

[islander200]

37 minutes ago, RovingRover said:

He was adequate. Adequate only gets you so far.

In other news I heard on the grapevine that Rovers might be interested in Conor Gallagher on loan from Chelsea.

He spoke highly of his time at Swansea and enjoys working with their manager after having him at under age level for England.

Iv seen him linked with premier league teams Crystal Palace and a couple of others, if on the off chance he does spend another year in the championship it will be with Swansea most likely 

[Wegerleswiggle]

48 minutes ago, RovingRover said:

He was adequate. Adequate only gets you so far.

In other news I heard on the grapevine that Rovers might be interested in Conor Gallagher on loan from Chelsea.

Where have you heard that about Gallagher mate? 

[Mike E]

46 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Can you see Souness signing him ?

#AliDia

[toogs]

29 minutes ago, Mike E said:

#AliDia

#Tugay

[Mercer]

4 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

The trading debts accrue in the BRFC company & BRFC's parent VLL converts a large portion of the debt into shares every year. It is pretty much what happened when JW owned Rovers. Ultimately, funds come from the group companies but arguably, the directors of the parent (i.e. the Raos) could take out lower dividends to allow funds to trickle down thus indirectly funding the group.

If BRFC makes profit on an "investment" player, it needs a smaller handout from the parent.

You are not quite right.

VLL's share issues are to create funds that are loaned to The Blackburn Rovers Football and Athletic Limited. 

Accounts year ended 30 June 2019 (for football club) showed 'Amounts owing to parent undertaking' of £126.8 million (see Creditors - amounts falling due within one year).

In the twelve months following 30 June 2019, VLL issued a further £19million in shares.  The amount owed by the football club to the holding company at 30 June 2020 is now likely to be approx. £150million and these monies are repayable, technically within 12 months (hence part of net current liabilities) although notes to the accounts show there is no fixed date for repayment.

VLL can pull the plug anytime it wishes.

Edited August 15, 2020 by Mercer

[Sparks Rover]

13 minutes ago, Mercer said:

VLL can pull the plug anytime it wishes.

Yes, but they take their debt with them.  They've underwritten their own loan.  Nobody will pay more than 15m I'd imagine seeing as they paid 24m and it has depreciated extensively over the last 10 years.

[Mercer]

5 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Yes, but they take their debt with them.  They've underwritten their own loan.  Nobody will pay more than 15m I'd imagine seeing as they paid 24m and it has depreciated extensively over the last 10 years.

Their Rovers' 'project' is now most likely pushing £200million factoring in acquisition costs and loans.

There will come a 'tipping point' - it's almost inevitable as I very much doubt they will continue to throw in some £20million every year (throwing good money after bad).  In the past, we've seen the likes of Hayward, Davies and Whelan all call time on their clubs - it happens.

IMO, and I've said this for a number of weeks now, the noose is tightening. 

Edited August 15, 2020 by Mercer

[Sparks Rover]

8 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Their Rovers' 'project' is now most likely pushing £200million factoring in acquisition costs and loans.

There will come a 'tipping point' - it's almost inevitable as I very much doubt they will continue to throw in some £20million every year (throwing good money after bad).  In the past, we've seen the likes of Hayward, Davies and Whelan all call time on their clubs - it happens.

IMO, and I've said this for a number of weeks now, the noose is tightening. 

So, its which shysters take over isn't it?

[JHRover]

2 hours ago, unsall said:

Not sure you can compare Venkys with Abramovich who is obviously a multi billionaire, everyone can see that every year on the rich list. Not sure anybody seen the Venkys in any rich list, obviously they are wealthy and could very well be billionaires but no one knows.

All companies have been affected with coved 19, massively, and not sure they are just going to put millions into Rovers when they have many firms to sort out, be nice for us if they would, but think it’s going to be a bit tighter this season till things get back to normal.

Hopefully some sort of budget but if we have to wheel and deal, so be it, as long as they keep  chucking in a few quid to keep us going day to day, we will have to put up with it, because I don’t think there is anybody out there to buy us with pots of cash.

I actually offered two comparisons - Abramovich and Marinakis - two wealthy businessmen who have managed to cope with Covid whilst still investing in their football clubs.

Whilst I accept Abramovich is likely to be richer than Venkys I don't think Marinakis qualifies as a billionaire whereas Venkys have been by their supporters.

The list goes on though. Birmingham have recruited a new management team and already a reasonable signing in George Friend despite supposedly being stuffed with FFP rules. We were told termination of Mowbray's contract and recruitment of a new manager were impossible in this economic climate.

At the end of the day I see a succession of excuses. If it isn't Covid 19 it is FFP rules. If it isn't that it's waiting until summer rather than spending in January. There's always a reason why business can't be done NOW. There's always an employee eager to point these excuses out and there's always a legion of fans happy to lap it up 

If these people were genuinely worth what has been claimed and were genuinely keen to get the club moving in the right direction they would find a way to do it.

Instead the policy seems to be to pull the shutters down and leave the club in its skeletal form to sort itself out. 

 

[Sparks Rover]

2 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I actually offered two comparisons - Abramovich and Marinakis - two wealthy businessmen who have managed to cope with Covid whilst still investing in their football clubs.

Whilst I accept Abramovich is likely to be richer than Venkys I don't think Marinakis qualifies as a billionaire whereas Venkys have been by their supporters.

The list goes on though. Birmingham have recruited a new management team and already a reasonable signing in George Friend despite supposedly being stuffed with FFP rules. We were told termination of Mowbray's contract and recruitment of a new manager were impossible in this economic climate.

At the end of the day I see a succession of excuses. If it isn't Covid 19 it is FFP rules. If it isn't that it's waiting until summer rather than spending in January. There's always a reason why business can't be done NOW. There's always an employee eager to point these excuses out and there's always a legion of fans happy to lap it up 

If these people were genuinely worth what has been claimed and were genuinely keen to get the club moving in the right direction they would find a way to do it.

Instead the policy seems to be to pull the shutters down and leave the club in its skeletal form to sort itself out. 

 

The massive difference between our owners and Chelsea's is a clear enjoyment of the game and a good understanding of who to administrate the club.  You can see Abramovich actually gets enthralled in the games, he loves the club. Our owners are so distant and seemingly disinterested irrespective of theit wealth 

[Mashed Potatoes]

9 hours ago, LDRover said:

Why do you only ever appear on here to respond to criticism against them or Mowbray?

Rubbish. Go on to the Champions League thread as evidence.

[Ossydave]

14 hours ago, neophox said:

What happened with the European scouting network? Zero happening there. Poor investment. 

I imagine that's erm somewhat difficult at present

[davulsukur]

6 hours ago, Sparks Rover said:

The massive difference between our owners and Chelsea's is a clear enjoyment of the game and a good understanding of who to administrate the club.  You can see Abramovich actually gets enthralled in the games, he loves the club. Our owners are so distant and seemingly disinterested irrespective of theit wealth 

Which always leads us back to the same question.

Why are Venkys here?

[Stuart]

15 minutes ago, davulsukur said:

Which always leads us back to the same question.

Why are Venkys here?

Logic says (yes, I know!) that it’s because it is in their interest to do so.

Kudos? None. Not at this stage - there could have been but that ship sailed long ago.

Financial? This means either they make money elsewhere by showing losses against Rovers. This would be my guess.

Cultural? Possibly, at first. Saving face and all that. ‘We are so rich we can stomach the losses’ might impress elsewhere.

Not the worst option? In other words there could be something bad which the accounts might show if dug into in any detail. Are the any statutes of limitations on how long a business has to keep records before they can be destroyed?

[Mattyblue]

7 hours ago, Mercer said:

 

IMO, and I've said this for a number of years now, the noose is tightening.