Transfer Window - COMPLETE. Where’s Gregg?

[Admiral Nelsen]

26 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

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

Can't really speak for others, but I think most who bring up FFP do so because it means Venkys wouldn't be allowed to spend much more than they do, even if they wanted to. 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, booth said:

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.

But surely you see that this is because they can't? Or are being told by Waggott and Pasha that they can't.

Until FFP is scrapped, and our crowds remain as they are, we'll be spending the same as others who get our crowd level. Fuck all.

[Dreams of 1995]

1 minute ago, Mellor Rover said:

But surely you see that this is because they can't? Or are being told by Waggott and Pasha that they can't.

Until FFP is scrapped, and our crowds remain as they are, we'll be spending the same as others who get our crowd level. Fuck all.

At the moment Mellor this is true. FFP is literally stopping the Venkys from spending any more on wages and transfers

The argument would be that, if FFP was scrapped tomorrow, would the Venkys then suddenly turn the taps on and spend?

You would have to imagine not, given that the typical day to day running costs of the Club not under the influence of FFP, ie: ground, are typically under funded

In this respect Venkys lose their credibility

Crowd really is insignificant. Other opportunities for increased revenue are there.

For example, they could spend £10/20 million on fixing the Riverside into a nice stand, hospitality, hotel or conference suite. They would need to spend that on a striker "if they could" and by doing this it would increase turnover. They won't because they don't want to.

But at the moment FFP is giving them an excuse not to invest on the pitch.

[Guest]

Just now, Dreams of 1995 said:

At the moment Mellor this is true. FFP is literally stopping the Venkys from spending any more on wages and transfers

The argument would be that, if FFP was scrapped tomorrow, would the Venkys then suddenly turn the taps on and spend?

You would have to imagine not, given that the typical day to day running costs of the Club not under the influence of FFP, ie: ground, are typically under funded

In this respect Venkys lose their credibility

Crowd really is insignificant. Other opportunities for increased revenue are there.

For example, they could spend £10/20 million on fixing the Riverside into a nice stand, hospitality, hotel or conference suite. They would need to spend that on a striker "if they could" and by doing this it would increase turnover. They won't because they don't want to.

But at the moment FFP is giving them an excuse not to invest on the pitch.

It's hard to debate hypothetical situations. Their track record isn't great, but they've spent money in the past, nobody can argue about that. Mowbray spunked his money in stupid places (5 mil Sam Gallagher) we'll never truly know how interested they are until the shackles are off.

[RV Blue]

57 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Marlon Fossey from Fulham would be a decent signing.

That rules us out then

[phili]

9 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

At the moment Mellor this is true. FFP is literally stopping the Venkys from spending any more on wages and transfers

The argument would be that, if FFP was scrapped tomorrow, would the Venkys then suddenly turn the taps on and spend?

You would have to imagine not, given that the typical day to day running costs of the Club not under the influence of FFP, ie: ground, are typically under funded

In this respect Venkys lose their credibility

Crowd really is insignificant. Other opportunities for increased revenue are there.

For example, they could spend £10/20 million on fixing the Riverside into a nice stand, hospitality, hotel or conference suite. They would need to spend that on a striker "if they could" and by doing this it would increase turnover. They won't because they don't want to.

But at the moment FFP is giving them an excuse not to invest on the pitch.

Crowd numbers is very important to attract better sponsors and advertising prospects.

[booth]

16 minutes ago, Mellor Rover said:

But surely you see that this is because they can't? Or are being told by Waggott and Pasha that they can't.

Until FFP is scrapped, and our crowds remain as they are, we'll be spending the same as others who get our crowd level. Fuck all.

That's what I was saying in my previous posts.

[Sparks Rover]

1 hour 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.

 

The business is a decent business, net worth 8m so the turnover is just for show.  And for a business like this they don't half have a shit logo and it should be nowhere near our shirts with a red devil on it.

Turnover at the Rovers reflects the clueless commercial department that we have,....I bet you as much as you want they've not paid 250k for that shirt sponsorship....

 

 

[Mattyblue]

2 minutes ago, phili said:

Crowd numbers is very important to attract better sponsors and advertising prospects.

Maybe don’t charge £430/£530 for any new or returning fan then…

[phili]

1 minute ago, Mattyblue said:

Maybe don’t charge £430/£530 for any new or returning fan then…

Yep which is why I struggle to figure out our pricing policy

[booth]

13 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

At the moment Mellor this is true. FFP is literally stopping the Venkys from spending any more on wages and transfers

The argument would be that, if FFP was scrapped tomorrow, would the Venkys then suddenly turn the taps on and spend?

You would have to imagine not, given that the typical day to day running costs of the Club not under the influence of FFP, ie: ground, are typically under funded

In this respect Venkys lose their credibility

Crowd really is insignificant. Other opportunities for increased revenue are there.

For example, they could spend £10/20 million on fixing the Riverside into a nice stand, hospitality, hotel or conference suite. They would need to spend that on a striker "if they could" and by doing this it would increase turnover. They won't because they don't want to.

But at the moment FFP is giving them an excuse not to invest on the pitch.

They'll spend on players if they think they can get the same or more back. That, and selling academy players seems to be the way they think a club should be ran. So I imagine if they could spend on players, they would.

The other things you mentioned won't have any chance of bringing the same return.

The riches of returning to the PL seems completely lost on them and now because of FFP, is a moot point anyway.

[Miller11]

1 hour 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.

 

Waggott has publicly stated that we won’t entertain gambling companies as sponsors for moral reasons, even though they offer far better financial incentive. So we’ve gone with a vaping company for less money.

I know gambling can destroy lives, but it is also enjoyed by millions moderately and recreationally. I use vaping products because I have been addicted to nicotine for over 20 years and it presents a much cheaper alternative to strongly regulated heavily taxed cigarettes. I don’t know anyone who vapes for a bit of recreation.

The moral stance is inconsistent at best. The commercial decision is costly.

[lraC]

1 hour 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.

 

Daughter in law works there, so myself my son and grandson, are all getting a reduce price shirt.

Seems pretty ethical to me.

[AJW]

11 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Maybe don’t charge £430/£530 for any new or returning fan then…

Whilst I cannot defend the pricing policy there are literally thousands of fans aren’t there ? who won’t set foot back in Ewood until Venkys leave , so to those fans the price really is irrelevant 

[chaddyrovers]

2 hours ago, unleaded said:

I don’t claim to be a ITK  .. all I do is pass on info or names I hear from people in the business  related to Rovers .. please don’t hold it against me if I get something wrong … Recruting lists usually have 5/ 6 players for each position .. some they just enquirer about then move on 

Thought it adds fun to a window to know names now & again which land or even if they don’t end up here …. I don’t make names up as that would be unfair on all here and I respect all members here ……

Thanks for the update and please keep posting what you hear please

[phili]

15 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

Waggott has publicly stated that we won’t entertain gambling companies as sponsors for moral reasons, even though they offer far better financial incentive. So we’ve gone with a vaping company for less money.

I know gambling can destroy lives, but it is also enjoyed by millions moderately and recreationally. I use vaping products because I have been addicted to nicotine for over 20 years and it presents a much cheaper alternative to strongly regulated heavily taxed cigarettes. I don’t know anyone who vapes for a bit of recreation.

The moral stance is inconsistent at best. The commercial decision is costly.

Supposedly we rejected a £1m+ offer from Bet365, so the decision to go with our shirt sponsor is probably costing us £15k a week in lost wage budget

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, AJW said:

Whilst I cannot defend the pricing policy there are literally thousands of fans aren’t there ? who won’t set foot back in Ewood until Venkys leave , so to those fans the price really is irrelevant 

£250 would test that theory.

[Exiled_Rover]

So that's our sponsor and FFP covered.

 

Any transfer news?

[Mattyblue]

31 minutes ago, AJW said:

Whilst I cannot defend the pricing policy there are literally thousands of fans aren’t there ? who won’t set foot back in Ewood until Venkys leave , so to those fans the price really is irrelevant 

Is there buggery!

[Sparks Rover]

10 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Is there buggery!

Ya, I'll buy it and put price up to 100 per ticket...thousands will come flocking lad

Edited July 11, 2022 by Sparks Rover

[TheRevAshton]

If he aint gonna sign a contract here come and get him - the sooner the better I guess!

They've just got £45m+ for Raphinha too I believe

Edited July 11, 2022 by TheRevAshton

[Mattyblue]

17 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Ya, I'll buy it and put price up to 100 per ticket...thousands will come flocking lad

Thousands would’ve come flocking if it’s been £100 this summer.

Thousands will come flocking in the PL.

Crowds are crap because we are bang average second division side with ridiculous ticket prices. 

Venky’s have caused all that, but it’s the shite and expensive product they provide that keeps folk away not Balaji bloody Rao himself!
 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Mattyblue

[bluebruce]

3 hours 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.

Are you referring to the UEFA changes, which I assumed only applied to clubs who qualify for European competition? I was under the impression the EFL sets its own 'FFP' rules.

[bluebruce]

3 hours ago, tomphil said:

If it was down to gate money dictating budget we'd be firmly in the middle of the league below.

Well we were 3rd for attendances in the season we spent down there, so I don't think so.

[bluebruce]

Berget having contract talks with Malmo. And Birmanevic thought to be outside our price range as other European clubs circle.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/20270780.jo-inge-berget-malmo-contract-talks-amid-blackburn-rovers-links/