Transfer Window - COMPLETE. Where’s Gregg?

[JHRover]

Football League clubs voted to introduce FFP. They could vote next week to scrap it. They won't so they need to start looking at themselves if they don't like it.

 

 

[Guest]

FFP is changing btw. I don't recall if it was discussed on here. It's getting a new name (again ffs) and the rules are drastically different. In some ways it's quite beneficial to us, in other ways it's quite painful for us. Haven't got the time right now to do a full deep dive on it but I'm sure others will have some insight too.

[47er]

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

FFP is changing btw. I don't recall if it was discussed on here. It's getting a new name (again ffs) and the rules are drastically different. In some ways it's quite beneficial to us, in other ways it's quite painful for us. Haven't got the time right now to do a full deep dive on it but I'm sure others will have some insight too.

Yes--- FFS!  Good name for it!

[Sparks Rover]

Top and bottom is we can't raise revenue through normal means, very low support means very low turnover whilst in this division. No TV money etc.

I just read that Sunderland paid £10m for Clarke from Spurs.....we are screwed if this is the case....they get 30k every week and can justify the spend.  Venkys have ripped the soul and support out of this club which means we are playing with one hand tied behind our backs.

[47er]

16 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

It is criminal in reality

In effect you are banning investment in a business

The idea it makes it more competitive is wrong, as has been seen by the significant gap in wealth that has occurred since the inception of FFP

Football fans really do need to get their act together. The problem is that so many people support the Premier League and the Big Clubs that it would be very difficult to gain a foothold

It is no surprise that Liverpool were the biggest driving force behind FFP. They have also gained the most from the lack of real investment in other Clubs

The line about slowly destroying Clubs is frighteningly accurate and part of my cynicism thinks this is by design. European wide authorities would rather a NFL style franchise where mega money and sponsorship deals is provided through a handful of 'clubs' each with a significant thanks owed to the authority (UEFA) for their existence

It is the wet dream of elites like Platini and co, and we are sleep walking into it whilst we bicker about the idiots who get caught up trying to clamber for crumbs at the big table (Venkys)

Makes no difference to us though. Anyone think Venkys would spend serious money on transfers if FFP went?

[47er]

47 minutes ago, phili said:

Pretty much.

If a fan was to buy Rovers today, there is not a lot they could do to invest without significantly increasing turnover.

I think I would bring catering, bars etc back under our control and reverse all outsourcing. Then reduce ticket prices to increase footfall and benefit from what fans spend in the ground. But it would be some time before you could make changes on wages etc sadly.

Unless you spent and were promoted in the one season?

[Exiled_Rover]

4 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Top and bottom is we can't raise revenue through normal means, very low support means very low turnover whilst in this division. No TV money etc.

I just read that Sunderland paid £10m for Clarke from Spurs.....we are screwed if this is the case....they get 30k every week and can justify the spend.  Venkys have ripped the soul and support out of this club which means we are playing with one hand tied behind our backs.

Transfermarkt reckons he's worth £3.15m, so they've been ripped off if they've paid £10m. 

Weren't they in massive financial trouble a few years ago? Where have they found £10m from?

[JHRover]

Just now, Sparks Rover said:

Top and bottom is we can't raise revenue through normal means, very low support means very low turnover whilst in this division. No TV money etc.

I just read that Sunderland paid £10m for Clarke from Spurs.....we are screwed if this is the case....they get 30k every week and can justify the spend.  Venkys have ripped the soul and support out of this club which means we are playing with one hand tied behind our backs.

There's nothing that Blackpool, Preston, Wigan, Dingles, Huddersfield, Hull, Birmingham, Rotherham, Coventry, Luton, Watford, Reading, Bristol, Cardiff, Swansea, QPR, Millwall have that we don't or can't have. So that's 75% of the league we should be as strong if not stronger than.

Of the rest we have Norwich, Sunderland, Sheff U, Middlesbrough, West Brom and Stoke.

Of which Norwich have zero external investment, West Brom relying on parachute money to stem losses and think Sheff U will be in financial trouble soon if they don't go up. Stoke's crowds have plummeted.

 

[windymiller7]

Just read this on SSN. No idea if he's any good or not but looks like he was on loan at Notlob last season. Says a number of Championship clubs interested.

Personally would prefer Byrne from Derby, but then again, I don't know anything about this lad:

Edited July 11, 2022 by windymiller7
spelling

[islander200]

8 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

Transfermarkt reckons he's worth £3.15m, so they've been ripped off if they've paid £10m. 

Weren't they in massive financial trouble a few years ago? Where have they found £10m from?

It's not £10 million.It could reach £10 million but with add ons that if reached he would probably be worth a lot more than £10 million international caps etc.

They paid £3 million for him 

[phili]

7 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

Transfermarkt reckons he's worth £3.15m, so they've been ripped off if they've paid £10m. 

Weren't they in massive financial trouble a few years ago? Where have they found £10m from?

Administration cleared all of their debts, new 26 year old billionaire owner as well as the ffp rules in league 1 means they can spend quite a bit this season and have no issues.

[Miller11]

1 hour ago, RoverRB said:

We’d be able to offer more if fans actually went to the games. Granted Waggott doesn’t help the situation by making tickets expensive.

We’d also be able to offer more if we looked a bit further afield than Stancliffe Street for a sponsor, put some companies other than Venky’s on the electronic advertising hoardings, and utilised the facilities at Ewood better on match days and non-match days.

Too easy to blame it all on the fans, despite that being exactly the narrative the club want to push.

[Mattyblue]

So FFP is scrapped and Venky’s are suddenly buying players for millions of quid? 

A bit of a stretch.
 

[Gavrover]

21 minutes ago, JoeH said:

FFP is changing btw. I don't recall if it was discussed on here. It's getting a new name (again ffs) and the rules are drastically different. In some ways it's quite beneficial to us, in other ways it's quite painful for us. Haven't got the time right now to do a full deep dive on it but I'm sure others will have some insight too.

It is indeed losses over 3 years are increasing to 60m (as long as cash is injected into club) the biggest issue is that wages and salaries will have to be 70% of income by 2025 (90 percent this year). Ours on last accounts were 13.5 million so we would only be able to spend 12.15 million on wages and transfers this year (although that doesn't account for any transfer money in) So you really need an Armstrong type sale every year..to top most of that up. As a a rough calculation if we only had 20 players and paid them equally it would be 11.5k a week each. 

[Sparks Rover]

7 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

We’d also be able to offer more if we looked a bit further afield than Stancliffe Street for a sponsor, put some companies other than Venky’s on the electronic advertising hoardings, and utilised the facilities at Ewood better on match days and non-match days.

Too easy to blame it all on the fans, despite that being exactly the narrative the club want to push.

This.

Far too much emphasis on community this freebies for all, etc....its all very nice but it actually costs the club money.

Looking on LinkedIn at some of the amateurs that work in commercial roles at the club its no wonder we are in the shit.  Like you say, 200 yards down the road for the shirt sponsor, a two Bob bit business with a questionable health issue down the line....🤷‍♂️🙈

 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Sparks Rover

[phili]

6 minutes ago, Gavrover said:

It is indeed losses over 3 years are increasing to 60m (as long as cash is injected into club) the biggest issue is that wages and salaries will have to be 70% of income by 2025 (90 percent this year). Ours on last accounts were 13.5 million so we would only be able to spend 12.15 million on wages and transfers this year (although that doesn't account for any transfer money in) So you really need an Armstrong type sale every year..to top most of that up. As a a rough calculation if we only had 20 players and paid them equally it would be 11.5k a week each. 

So we need to potentially cut up to half our wage bill this year as presently 130% of turnover down to 90%. That is going to be some ask and our available wage budget is probably 10-20k a week following the departures to comply with this.

[JHRover]

Given our limited income (at least partly self inflicted) what would be very useful is to be able to sell a couple of players for big money, then use that money to our advantage over rivals.

The cash we got for Armstrong immediately wipes out any advantage the likes of Middlesbrough or other non-parachute clubs have over us. But the money disappears.

Fortunately we've another asset who will have to be sold for the same again this summer. Perfect. But we know those funds won't see the light of day either.

Point being that we can feel sorry for ourselves about income and FFP all day long - the Armstrong, Brereton, Lenihan, Nyambe and Rothwell situations prove that the Club won't reinvest and won't protect its assets, so what should have been a huge financial advantage over rivals has achieved nothing - not even willing to pay players the going rate so they leave for nothing.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

.  Like you say, 200 yards down the road for the shirt sponsor, a two Bob bit business with a questionable health issue down the line....🤷‍♂️🙈

 

Which just goes to show what some people actually know a) about business b) about the £80 million turnover, 500 employee, ethically sound business down the road that sponsors us and c) what the staff in the commercial dept at Rovers actually do for a living.

I am fairly certain you've never built a business from nothing to multi-million turnover in under 5 years, unless you'd care to put me right on that.

 

[RoversClitheroe]

Marlon Fossey from Fulham would be a decent signing.

[roversfan99]

37 minutes ago, 47er said:

Makes no difference to us though. Anyone think Venkys would spend serious money on transfers if FFP went?

Its absolutely crazy how many seem so convinced that FFP is stopping them from spending any more.

[Armchair supporter supremo]

5 minutes ago, Shirley Crabtree Wrestler said:

Which just goes to show what some people actually know a) about business b) about the £80 million turnover, 500 employee, ethically sound business down the road that sponsors us and c) what the staff in the commercial dept at Rovers actually do for a living.

I am fairly certain you've never built a business from nothing to multi-million turnover in under 5 years, unless you'd care to put me right on that.

 

Still a grubby industry to be in and totally wicked have blatantly been one of the worst for targeting their poisonious wears at younsters right from the off with their tacky marketing and logos. 

Defintely shouldn't be on the shirts of professional footballers for the same reason cigarettes and alcohol are no longer allowed (can't remember if gambling business are still allowed, but theu shouldn't be) 

 

P. S. Yes nicotine is technically very much a poison, a potentially fatal and extremely highly addictive one at that. 

[booth]

50 minutes ago, 47er said:

Yes--- FFS!  Good name for it!

Brilliant! 🤣

[booth]

31 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

So FFP is scrapped and Venky’s are suddenly buying players for millions of quid? 

A bit of a stretch.
 

They've spent millions in the past, but I don't think the issue right now is spending millions of quid - a couple of hundred grand seems like a stretch for Rovers at the moment thanks to FFP.

How the hell is a club supposed to attract fans back to the stadium if they can't invest in the product?

We have the fit & proper rule to make sure that only the very worst owners take over football clubs, and FFP to make sure we stay where we fall.

[Mattyblue]

4 minutes ago, booth said:

They've spent millions in the past, but I don't think the issue right now is spending millions of quid - a couple of hundred grand seems like a stretch for Rovers at the moment thanks to FFP.

How the hell is a club supposed to attract fans back to the stadium if they can't invest in the product?

We have the fit & proper rule to make sure that only the very worst owners take over football clubs, and FFP to make sure we stay where we fall.

In the early days, yes.

But is there any appetite from them to do so now? Suppose we’ll never know with FFP in place, but the state of non FFP impacted club infrastructure that is suffering from a chronic lack of investment, says not.

Edited July 11, 2022 by Mattyblue

[booth]

25 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Its absolutely crazy how many seem so convinced that FFP is stopping them from spending any more.

It's giving them a solid excuse.

Put it this way I'd be surprised to see us spend £5 or £7m on a striker again. It'd be a shocker if they spent £1m.