Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?

[islander200]

4 minutes ago, 47er said:

For goodness sake, it doesn't matter how much money you put in if it isn't spent wisely and you don't take responsibility for it?

In the current situation they could put any amount in but it would be wasted like the rest has been.

In any case most of the money they put in is to settle debt or rather interest on debt their practices created.

Most of it is about accounting not football and merely has the effect of enabling the club to stumble form one crisis to the next.

Mate i have never once argued that viewpoint so not sure what you are on about?

My arguments are with the statement that they are unwilling to spend money, when the league rules(something the owners have no control over) wont allow them as they have hit the limit.They have wasted 141 million.The club needed the 16 million injected or do you want sanctions.There was nothing stopping the owners not setting this company up, not injecting 16.6 million into the club,keeping it and then selling it directly to a develepor.If someone can give me a legitimate reason why this is some sort of ploy im all ears

[islander200]

4 hours ago, Sparks Rover said:

They've basically remortgaged the training centre.  Sale and leaseback is very common for businesses wanting to realise an injection of cash.  The new business will  be borrowing at a very low rate which will be amortised across a period of time.  The benefit is that the payments can be off set against Corp tax and profits taxes....its probably a very clever because the accounts across the group will balance out.  That's my opinion.

 

This made me piss my pants when we talk about the upkeep of the facilities....about 25 seconds in.....🙄

 

 

 

 

In essence the venkys will be paying the mortgage off anyway as the club is reliant on their support.

Its not ideal but like if they wanted to sell the training ground at any point could we have stopped it?The headline could have read STC sold to the issa brothers.

The club obviously needed this money being put in.

 

[RoversClitheroe]

If we have got funds ready for the Summer you have to assume a manager is going to be in place to take over from Mowbray.

With rumours of Wilder and Neil coming up and with the attraction of a bit budget they could yet be convinced.

Would be absolutely apalled if this money is given to Mowbray to waste on Pears et al.

[roversfan99]

The Alex Neil rumour came from Mercer who has the worst track record imaginable and there have been no credible rumours of Wilder either.

I also think that it is totally disingenous to suggest that Mowbray would automatically waste the money "on Pears et al." His transfer record is very mixed but to focus too much on Pears (potential nepotism aside) who is a sub keeper is unfair. The main 2 question marks are the 12m duo, one of whom has started to come good (not to a 7m degree) and the other is pretty poor yet not totally without use. But there have been some good ones, Dack, Kaminski, Armstrong who made the club lots of money and a fair few others. A decent amount of rubbish too so a mixture.

I would love a manager like Wilder and a healthy budget next summer but I suspect that the chance is slim to nil under Venkys. More likely is more Mowbray or someone new lacking competence and working on a shoestring.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Would be absolutely apalled if this money is given to Mowbray to waste on Pears et al.

👍

[lraC]

8 hours ago, Crimpshrine said:

Do we even know where the £16 million has gone? It may not even be recorded as income for the club - it may go to VLL who can actually do what they want with it.

Assuming it is income for the club, I don't think there will be any extra cash because this £16 million will be offset against the annual losses and VLL will put in £16 million less than usual. It may help to keep the figures within FFP rules but I doubt it will make a difference to the club budget.

 

It may well have been used to pay them back some of the debt. Gives them the funds for their next music project, or Bollywood scheme, or even for a few more injections.

[Mike E]

It's hit me that we're all discussing something that SHOULD NOT HAPPEN.

FFP compliance would be completely irrelevant if the club was properly run.

That is why things like selling the training ground hurts.

'Managed decline' is the right term, and there's no need for it.

More canny money management, proper fan engagement, employment of more competent managers (and being more responsive to those managers and their performance), and leaping on to the marketing dreams presented (THE team in halved kits, the Oxford game, Diaz) would ALL have generated more funds and kept FFP a box-tick rather than a sword of demacles.

I often wonder how we'd have got on if only they'd just given Big Sam the money spent by Kean. We'd have been rolling in PL riches for at least a few years more 😞

[islander200]

7 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

The Alex Neil rumour came from Mercer who has the worst track record imaginable and there have been no credible rumours of Wilder either.

I also think that it is totally disingenous to suggest that Mowbray would automatically waste the money "on Pears et al." His transfer record is very mixed but to focus too much on Pears (potential nepotism aside) who is a sub keeper is unfair. The main 2 question marks are the 12m duo, one of whom has started to come good (not to a 7m degree) and the other is pretty poor yet not totally without use. But there have been some good ones, Dack, Kaminski, Armstrong who made the club lots of money and a fair few others. A decent amount of rubbish too so a mixture.

I would love a manager like Wilder and a healthy budget next summer but I suspect that the chance is slim to nil under Venkys. More likely is more Mowbray or someone new lacking competence and working on a shoestring.

Tony Mowbray has not worked on a shoestring up until this summer.

Now do you think we were close to the ffp limit or do you still think it was "dreamnt up by the fans"

[Gav]

29 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Tony Mowbray has not worked on a shoestring up until this summer.

Now do you think we were close to the ffp limit or do you still think it was "dreamnt up by the fans"

How much has Mowbray spent in 5yrs on transfer fees Islander? Serious questions.

Every post I read of yours perpetuates this theory that he's been well backed, compared to the likes of Barnsley he has yes, Barnsley are a mid table championship club at best like us, but compared to the likes of West Brom, Fulham, Norwich, Leeds, Bournemouth and Brentford the playoff/promotion contenders, he's nowhere near.

[arbitro]

9 minutes ago, Gav said:

How much has Mowbray spent in 5yrs on transfer fees Islander? Serious questions.

Every post I read of yours perpetuates this theory that he's been well backed, compared to the likes of Barnsley he has yes, Barnsley are a mid table championship club at best like us, but compared to the likes of West Brom, Fulham, Norwich, Leeds, Bournemouth and Brentford the playoff/promotion contenders, he's nowhere near.

I don't think it's the transfer fees that have caused the main problem. I think it's a lot more to do with spending massively above income, 187% last year. Roughly that equates to around £8m last year and similar amounts for previous seasons. The whole management team of Rovers are culpable here. And a big chunk of that has been spent on dross and needless contract extensions.

[islander200]

53 minutes ago, Gav said:

How much has Mowbray spent in 5yrs on transfer fees Islander? Serious questions.

Every post I read of yours perpetuates this theory that he's been well backed, compared to the likes of Barnsley he has yes, Barnsley are a mid table championship club at best like us, but compared to the likes of West Brom, Fulham, Norwich, Leeds, Bournemouth and Brentford the playoff/promotion contenders, he's nowhere near.

Its not just about transfer fees he has been well backed over the 5 years 

Those clubs had parachute payments, others sold players 

In 5 years mowbray has sold 2 players of value, Raya and Armstrong and one of those came from academy 

And the raft of cheap poor players signed snd kept on for the legnth of their contracts or even worse getting contract extensions how many times did sam hart get his deal extended.All these cheap signings added together will have cost 

You also have the costly Ayala, Holtby , Johnson deals were no transfer fee involved but were on more money prior to coming here stamds to reason signing on fees involved.Players with NO resale value.

Il do the math later but Gallagher and brereton were 12 alone 

Im not saying the backing he recieved should have guaranteed promotion but i dont expect the squad in the state it is in either 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by islander200

[davulsukur]

Whatever the reason for this sale is, it won't be to bring in a decent manager and give them a healthy budget with eyes on a promotion push. Not at all. 

This is Venkys we are talking about. Not an ounce of ambition between them.

[islander200]

4 minutes ago, davulsukur said:

Whatever the reason for this sale is, it won't be to bring in a decent manager and give them a healthy budget with eyes on a promotion push. Not at all. 

This is Venkys we are talking about. Not an ounce of ambition between them.

Yeah but its better than a transfer ban and possible points deduction.

 

[tomphil]

10 hours ago, islander200 said:

They spent to make the black hole in the first place.

There is nothing to suggest we were on the brink of admin.Even this summer not a lot was spent but a little was.The owners simply cant put in more money at this point without exceeding what is allowed through owner support.

Im sounding like a venky apologist so i will make my position clear I think they have zero interest and have no plan and repeatedly make the same mistakes but they have put money into the club through transfers.

They wouldnt put the club on the market first before considering Admin?

This has all been seen before (not talking about training ground)we go through periods of spending then it stops then it starts again...there are 141 million reasons to suggest the venkys didnt come for quick buck, a lot of factors support that viewpoint imo.Its quite clear from finance experts alligned with the accounts that this money was needed otherwise the threat of  sanctions.Thats not to say when the owners are allowed to throw more money down the drain they wont do.

 

It's all assumption, there was nothing to say we were on the brink of admin and i didn't say that. However the club obviously desperately needed this massive cash injection on the back of the pandemic etc. With the owners supposedly not being able to inject it, on the back of the colossal amount they already share issued, i'am not sure what other options there would have been.

Fortunately we still had an asset to sell other than Armstrong, next time we won't have.

[islander200]

6 hours ago, lraC said:

It may well have been used to pay them back some of the debt. Gives them the funds for their next music project, or Bollywood scheme, or even for a few more injections.

Pay themselves?The 16.6 million came from the venkys

[JHRover]

Pretty much every club that has had FFP issues has had something to show for it at the end of the day.

Bournemouth - got promoted and stayed in the PL

Leicester - got promoted and stayed in the PL

QPR - got promoted then came back down

Sheffield Wed - 2x play off campaigns including narrowly losing in the final

Fulham - 2x promotions to the PL and looking like doing it again at a canter

Cardiff - 2x promotions to the PL

Reading - spent most of last season in the top 6 and also lost the play off final on pens a few years ago

Birmingham - probably the most similar to us in being a dysfunctional mess but they have spent reasonably heavily and I don't recall them ever bringing in the sort of money we have through sales

Derby - regular play off challengers including losing in 2 finals.

So all in all it goes to show that those who have had FFP issues - and remember we've had them twice whereas most of the above haven't - usually the offenders have some sort of success to show for it and their efforts. Some clubs have fallen short - Derby and Reading - showing that there is no guarantee breaking the rules leads to success - but they've a hell of a lot more to show for their offences than we have, where our greatest achievement has been bouncing back out of League One and being at best a mid-table side in the Championship.

Again none of this is necessary. The jokers running Rovers would love it if the gullible fans just believed that this is the only way of doing things - that the only way we can exist at this altitude is by way of massive losses, walking a FFP tightrope and that there is no alternative to this and Venkys.

Of course that is absolute nonsense, as many rival clubs prove the rules can be adhered to without plummeting, sanctions can be avoided with astute management, training grounds don't need taking out of club ownership, managers who fail to achieve targets can be sacked easily and quickly without the cost causing FFP problems.

Too many people in the fanbase can't see the wood for the trees and just accept the words of 'experts' or failures like Waggott without engaging their own brains and thoughts.

That is why it is so easy for them to continue to run the club in this way with little to no opposition or hassle. No surprises when the Telegraph immediately and without question trot out the 'club spokesman' line and get a 'finance expert' to tell us what is going on.

Who the hell is the 'club spokesman' and has this person got access to the owners? Would be useful to know. Is it Waggott hiding behind anonymity and if so why? Or is it someone else privy to the inner workings?

[islander200]

3 minutes ago, tomphil said:

It's all assumption, there was nothing to say we were on the brink of admin and i didn't say that. However the club obviously desperately needed this massive cash injection on the back of the pandemic etc. With the owners supposedly not being able to inject it, on the back of the colossal amount they already share issued, i'am not sure what other options there would have been.

Fortunately we still had an asset to sell other than Armstrong, next time we won't have.

But they will be allowed to put more money in from the summer.

Obviously im not saying i know they will do that for a fact but history tells us they do spend some money when allowed

[RoverCanada]

16 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Birmingham - probably the most similar to us in being a dysfunctional mess but they have spent reasonably heavily and I don't recall them ever bringing in the sort of money we have through sales

haha, really?

(They also booked a £17m profit from selling their stadium a couple years ago)

[Ulrich]

The big problem was the paying off of all of Jerome's crappy players, how many millions disappeared? We are being asset stripped, raped and pillaged, Brockhall will make them richer and our club owes them every penny, they have already robbed.  It pisses me off some fans still cling to hope after 11 years of this bollocks, there is no hope, it is all false and at the end we will be a train wreck. Wake up people.

[Gav]

1 hour ago, arbitro said:

I don't think it's the transfer fees that have caused the main problem. I think it's a lot more to do with spending massively above income, 187% last year. Roughly that equates to around £8m last year and similar amounts for previous seasons. The whole management team of Rovers are culpable here. And a big chunk of that has been spent on dross and needless contract extensions.

I'm not talking about FFP to be honest arbitro, I keep reading Mowbray has been well backed, every club pays wages, our wage structure comes from years of managed living beyond our means, its not a Mowbray thing at all. 

We have been under FFP transfer embargo before, 2015 springs to mind, these owners don't have the capacity to learn from past mistakes, thats the real crux of the matter.

On transfers, we've spent very little over 5yrs and the money has has spent has been well spent in the main, but its nowhere near enough to get us into the Premiership, thats my main point really. 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Gav

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

1 hour ago, tomphil said:

 

Fortunately we still had an asset to sell other than Armstrong, next time we won't have.

Sell if there's profit,sell,sell and sell,just no ambition.That alone tells us all we need to know.

The situation is clear for me...if they can't take Rovers forward then for God's sake put the Club up for sale and we can ALL move on for the better.

Where is this Good news you touched upon Roverite?

[RevidgeBlue]

11 minutes ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

Where is this Good news you touched upon Roverite?

He may be off the message board for a bit longer due to a bereavement in the family.

[davulsukur]

1 hour ago, islander200 said:

Yeah but its better than a transfer ban and possible points deduction.

 

Certainly is but if we needed £16m to stave off FFP then it's purely a matter of time before we are hit with a ban and points deduction.

[arbitro]

22 minutes ago, Gav said:

I'm not talking about FFP to be honest arbitro, I keep reading Mowbray has been well backed, every club pays wages, our wage structure comes from years of living beyond our means, its not a Mowbray thing at all. 

We have been under FFP transfer embargo before, 2015 springs to mind, these owners don't have the capacity to learn from past mistakes, thats the real crux of the matter.

On transfers, we've spent very little over 5yrs and the money has has spent has been well spent in the main, but its nowhere near enough to get us into the Premiership, thats my main point really. 

But Gav spending an incredible amount of money you don't have and P&S are intrinsically linked. Let's just assume we weren't at the ridiculous levels of outgoings and it was at a manageable proportion of say 110% of income. That would equate to around £6m less expenditure season on season by my rough calculation. If the spend was managed better we wouldn't be in the ridiculous situation whereby a new company is set up to purchase the training ground to circumvent the P&S rules. And the responsibility for spending a huge amount season on season lies with the people on the ground at Ewood and the owners. In any other business any manager going over budget would be reeled in but at Rovers the wanton spending has been allowed to continue unabated (although in fairness that could apply to lots of football clubs).

[RevidgeBlue]

12 minutes ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

Sell if there's profit,sell,sell and sell,just no ambition.That alone tells us all we need to know.

The situation is clear for me...if they can't take Rovers forward then for God's sake put the Club up for sale and we can ALL move on for the better.

Where is this Good news you touched upon Roverite?

We haven't "sold" it, that's exactly the point.

The owners couldn't inject any more money in by any other means without facing sanctions under the daft FFP rules.

This way, we avoid any FFP sanctions, the STC remains under Club ownership and isn't transferred to Persimmon Homes or Venus Property Developments or whatever and we should have far more wiggle room in January  and next summer now the Armstrong proceeds have been received as well.

We'll have to wait and see how well any available funds are utilised of course, personally I wouldn't want Mowbray spending (wasting) a penny of it but at face value it's a win win scenario for me compared to what could have happened.

And yes, I know we shouldn't have got to that situation in the first place but once it had already happened, it needed to be resolved.