Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?

[RevidgeBlue]

58 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

Sorry @Revidge Blue you are right. I meant training ground and will edit accordingly. 

Either way it's a very worrying situation and similarity. 

 

Yes,

No need whatsoever to apologise I completely agree with the overall gist and sentiment of your post.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

How much does the academy cost?

Apparently £3.1m p.a. out of which we get a grant of £1.2m to subsidise it. So £1.9m p.a. net.

Probably less than Mulgrew's and Ayala's wages not to play for us for 12 months.

[JHRover]

The sale of Phil Jones has probably covered the net cost of our academy over the last 10 years.

Of course there have been a few additional expenses beyond the basic running costs such as the new floodlights and classrooms but in the scheme of things we aren't talking mega money here. 

In our squad at present we have Lenihan, Nyambe, Buckley, JRC, Travis and Wharton when fit all featuring with regularity in the first team. 

Even if we ignore their transfer values (which combined ought to eclipse the academy running costs over the last 5 years) and just focus on their roles in our Championship squad - that alone should make the owners and management desperate to ensure the academy is protected and is able to prosper moving forward. Nothing at all should be done that might jeopardize that status.

I've heard what Waggott has said about protecting the academy but I just don't believe it is likely to happen on a site that size and with those restrictions - is it really all worth it so Mowbray can keep an eye on the u18s training and they can have breakfast together in the canteen?

[darrenrover]

2 hours ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

Are the ex Boro guys all HSH?

No, Colin Wanker's covert player agency!

[AllRoverAsia]

https://roverstogetheratbrockhall.uk/

It's live at last. Just about to look at it.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

4 hours ago, AllRoverAsia said:

https://roverstogetheratbrockhall.uk/

It's live at last. Just about to look at it.

Some brilliant spin in there. I would be curious as to the FFP rules around training centres - especially academies. I.e can they  spend on the training ground without impacting ffp ? In which case it wouldn't necessarily need to be self funding.

[J*B]

5 minutes ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

Some brilliant spin in there. I would be curious as to the FFP rules around training centres - especially academies. I.e can they  spend on the training ground without impacting ffp ? In which case it wouldn't necessarily need to be self funding.

Yes 

[tomphil]

The gist is the owners haven't pitched this the club have - the club being Waggot, Mowbray & Venus....

They don't even know how much the new facility will cost and don't appear to have a guarantee from India to make up the difference. If that difference is too large what happens then ?  What's the next step in the grand plan, sell players to cover it ? Take it from the 1st team budget ?  Or just cut corners and downscale the refurb rendering it pointless in the first place ?

Bullshit of the highest order this is, they just want that stamp of building approval asap then get the money in and go from there by sounds of it.

No owner or director in their right mind would sign this off its been cooked up in the boot room at Ewood.

More worrying is do they actually legally need approval from India to push this through ?

Edited March 11, 2021 by tomphil

[JHRover]

Has Waggott shed any light yet on this new 'coaching structure' that keeps being mentioned and why the existing facilities prevent that being implemented right now?

I wonder if it will be similar to Waggott's new management structure that he made a fuss about but which changed nothing?

I'm convinced he doesn't actually believe what he comes out with and its just hot air to try and impress people.

[Oldgregg86]

The fact the have used under one roof at Coventry and now here literally a carbon copy with the same three guys just trying to top up the pension funds and sail into the sunset . Anyone who Isn’t vehemently against this proposal needs there heads examining . The journey is literally cash up and go

[tomphil]

I also think if this gets pushed through it'll mean another 4 year contract for the midtable messiah. Then the water treading excuse will be because of the training ground upheavel whilst he works on implementing the 'Brentford model'.

Surely with a cat 1 academy already in place and two sites on the go the likes of Brentford were aspiring to be us ? 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

On 08/03/2021 at 22:47, Rovers Trust said:

Saved me a job there, thank you!

Is the Trust against the development? In your press release it says you aren't necessarily against 'progress' but are vigilant to preserving Jack's legacy etc. (or words that effect) 

Just wondering what your position is. Apologies if I've missed it. 

Edited March 11, 2021 by Hoochie Bloochie Mama

[AllRoverAsia]

52 minutes ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

Some brilliant spin in there. I would be curious as to the FFP rules around training centres - especially academies. I.e can they  spend on the training ground without impacting ffp ? In which case it wouldn't necessarily need to be self funding.

They have a PR outfit in tow - all mouth no trousers

[Herbie6590]

The Price of Football podcast is a fascinating listen...especially this segment (43 minutes in) many parallels between Coventry & Rovers...

https://overcast.fm/+UstefRZK4/42:57

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

There are a couple of reasons why this move would be logical :-

1. There would be significant year on year cost savings for the club 

2. No impact on 1st team facilities and Academy status

Whichever way you cut it - we have to become more self sufficient. But I worry we can only do this once - and it will be a saleable asset lost forever. I remain to be convinced regarding 2.

[Herbie6590]

1 hour ago, tomphil said:

The gist is the owners haven't pitched this the club have - the club being Waggot, Mowbray & Venus....

They don't even know how much the new facility will cost and don't appear to have a guarantee from India to make up the difference. If that difference is too large what happens then ?  What's the next step in the grand plan, sell players to cover it ? Take it from the 1st team budget ?  Or just cut corners and downscale the refurb rendering it pointless in the first place ?

Bullshit of the highest order this is, they just want that stamp of building approval asap then get the money in and go from there by sounds of it.

No owner or director in their right mind would sign this off its been cooked up in the boot room at Ewood.

More worrying is do they actually legally need approval from India to push this through ?

The boards of BRFC (& presumably VLL) will have oversight...& ultimate accountability as they sign off the accounts. 

[Herbie6590]

1 hour ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

Some brilliant spin in there. I would be curious as to the FFP rules around training centres - especially academies. I.e can they  spend on the training ground without impacting ffp ? In which case it wouldn't necessarily need to be self funding.

Expenditure like this is allowable under FFP...

[tomphil]

3 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

The boards of BRFC (& presumably VLL) will have oversight...& ultimate accountability as they sign off the accounts. 

Do they have to sign off the bill of sale though or can the CEO of Blackburn Rovers, the company the land belongs to not just do it ?

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

24 minutes ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

1. There would be significant year on year cost savings for the club 

How much?

[Ulrich]

So basically we are having our pants pulled down again?

[1864roverite]

So in another conspiracy we now have the Coventry 3 together again with a view to ripping off venkys by selling part of our training facilities?

I understand the views and thoughts and concerns, I am not behind the sale of the facilities however as a realistic view apart from selling everything and moving elsewhere what are alternative options open to the club?

[AllRoverAsia]

I am struggling with anger management issues so will sit that one out.

[JacknOry]

Apparently when buildings are 30-years old, they need replacing.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

1 minute ago, renrag said:

It should never be considered a saleable asset! It’s a football asset vital to the future of the club

Why is it vital ? Not trying to be provocative - but IF Cat 1 status is maintained, and facilities for the 1st team are appropriate - why is it vital for the future of the club ? 

[JHRover]

37 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

So in another conspiracy we now have the Coventry 3 together again with a view to ripping off venkys by selling part of our training facilities?

I understand the views and thoughts and concerns, I am not behind the sale of the facilities however as a realistic view apart from selling everything and moving elsewhere what are alternative options open to the club?

How about we keep what we have? IF there are issues with outdated facilities or pitches (unlikely) then spend some money improving them. I very much doubt that this is the case. The last time I visited the facilities remained excellent and better than most in the top 2 divisions.

Waggott reckons Venkys might need to top up the funding gap to get this project delivered. So surely they could chuck in the same amount to refurbish the existing facilities which would be much quicker and easier than building a new centre.

I suppose it comes down to trust. I don't trust Waggott and that is based on his track record. I've seen no improvement at the club during his 3 years and actually attendances have fallen and facilities deteriorated further on his watch. 

The trouble we have here is that is is non reversible process. Once its sold and permission granted its gone. The club shrinks, assets diminish. Gone. 

Even the way they have done this increases concerns. The secretive moves behind the scenes. The hasty statement released to try and put a positive spin on it after the news was out. The absolute nonsense about a new 'coaching structure' or outdated facilities. Its all bunkum.

I suspect this is concocted by Waggott and supported by Mowbray and Venus. Venkys could stop it but likely will fall for the same drivel as many of our fans already have. Obviously Venkys will like the sound of saving more money with one site and probably support the new 'coaching structure' led to believe it will improve our fortunes or academy performance.

I believe their involvement will end at that. I don't believe that they will pour in millions more to build new facilities.

The rest will be left to Waggott and his associates. He seems to spend a lot of his time dealing with property and construction projects and did at Southend, Gillingham and Coventry too. Brockhall will be the biggest and juiciest of the lot. Imagine going from Roots Hall and Priestfield to Brockhall. Its the big time.