Venky’s v Indian Government (a) - 13/1/2025 - Re-Arranged Challenge Match

[Mattyblue]

Always good to read from the moral conscience of brfcs.

[Blue blood]

1 hour ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

You might be happy but all the people who lose their livelihoods as a result would not be. A very selfish attitude on your part.

I'm no economist but I'm fairly sure that the loss of over 12k regular fans might have had an impact on local businesses and the like. I dare say Swag's cost cutting measures haven't helped us boost the local economy either. 

[Leonard Venkhater]

42 minutes ago, simongarnerisgod said:

i think you are getting rather carried away with the employment issue my point was rather hypothetical anyway,definately a worst case scenario and the the fact the club will always be here,it won`t cease to exist and will be venky free

Yep. Fck off, Venky's!

[simongarnerisgod]

6 minutes ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

Yep. Fck off, Venky's!

i 1000% concur,f**k off you bunch of chicken slaughterers

[RevidgeBlue]

3 hours ago, 47er said:

If there's no ability to fund the club, how can they be appropriate owners? Do we have to wait till we are bankrupt and bills aren't paid?

It seems to me the owners can't guarantee they can run the club next year.

 

They have actually guaranteed the same in the accounts stating that they will fund the Club for the foreseeable future even if Bank facilities are withdrawn etc etc.

Of course whether that Guarantee is worth the paper it's written on is very much a matter of opinion bearing in mind the events of the last 15 months or so.

I'm guessing that if pushed Waggott and the owners would concede that they now want the Club to wash it's own face as far as possible but make out that wherever necessary the owners would step in to keep the Club running if needed.

Whether or not any comfort can be taken from that assurance is doubtful given that it appears they are currently able but seemingly unwilling to provide the Club with any funding for anything over and above essential day to day running costs such as transfers etc. Remember us being told originally  they could ask the Court for money for essential day to day running expenses but not transfer funding? Having learned a little more about it and with the benefit of hindsight that now all seems like a load of hogwash.

From the poster who says he was "lucky" enough to have have had a conversation with Suhail recently it appears clear that they now seem to  view the Court proceedings as more or less an irrelevance. Perhaps they are committed to funding the Club as required because otherwise that's an extremely naive and complacent view point. NEWSFLASH: There isn't an Adam Wharton round every corner - there isn't even a Szmodics - maybe a  Carter currently who is worth around half a Szmodics so unless they are willing to start  putting money in again Herbie's scenario of us being unable to pay our bills and the Footballing authorities over here starting to become involved won't be too far away.

[RevidgeBlue]

As a side note after fourteen years it seems like we might be in exactly the same boat as regards the owners as we were in the latter stages of Walker Trust ownership with them refusing to put any further money in - only a division lower, with a decimated fan base and the Club technically £250m in debt to said ownership.

Fourteen completely wasted years and that's putting it mildly. 

[Mashed Potatoes]

25 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

As a side note after fourteen years it seems like we might be in exactly the same boat as regards the owners as we were in the latter stages of Walker Trust ownership with them refusing to put any further money in - only a division lower, with a decimated fan base and the Club technically £250m in debt to said ownership.

Fourteen completely wasted years and that's putting it mildly. 

According to the Venkys London accounts for March 2024 published earlier this week the debt owed by the club stood at £134m. Some of the money initially injected as debt has been converted in to equity. Having said that, given that the club's turnover is less than £30m there is not much effective difference between that number and £250m.

[Herbie6590]

8 hours ago, 47er said:

If there's no ability to fund the club, how can they be appropriate owners? Do we have to wait till we are bankrupt and bills aren't paid?

It seems to me the owners can't guarantee they can run the club next year.

 

What you are hoping the FA will do is to investigate a situation that might happen…

Last time they couldn’t fund, they borrowed £10m from a bloke in Bolton. Who’s to say they won’t do something similar in future? 

[roversfan99]

4 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

As a side note after fourteen years it seems like we might be in exactly the same boat as regards the owners as we were in the latter stages of Walker Trust ownership with them refusing to put any further money in - only a division lower, with a decimated fan base and the Club technically £250m in debt to said ownership.

Fourteen completely wasted years and that's putting it mildly. 

They havent been putting money in for a long while, covering losses by raising shares is something they have to do if they for whatever reason want or need to keep the club going.

We havent spent over £2m on a player in over 5 years. In which time we have sold a number of big money assets and been overreliant on promoting academy graduates.

Of course the difference between the latter stages of the Walker Trust ownership was that even though it was frustrating, it was always at least the case that the club was run efficiently with good people on the ground and not a huge lag between Ewood and India as we see today.

[tomphil]

Funding the club if bank facilities were withdrawn is a bold statement indeed so why aren't the authorities asking for proof of this ?

In the Venky bean counters minds it probably just means we'll sell everyone and everything that isn't nailed down and there's enough there to keep us going for a bit whilst we sort something else.

Pretty much what happened at Bolton after the kettle element fella had left and wrote off his 100 million.

The CEO of the company should be asking in no uncertain terms of proof of these words in the accounts as to how they'd fund it as an ongoing concern should the worst happen.

Will he ?  Will he feck it'll just be well Suhail said that Balaji said that Mr & Mrs D said we'll be fine.

 

[philipl]

9 hours ago, Forever Blue said:

£20m a year is a drop in the ocean when you’re a billionaire. Big Baz probably spends more than that on parties.

250m is more than 10% of their official acknowledged wealth.

 

[Upside Down]

8 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

You might be happy but all the people who lose their livelihoods as a result would not be. A very selfish attitude on your part.

How many have already lost their livelihoods because of venkys?

What about their disastrous effect on the town as a whole?

[47er]

8 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

You might be happy but all the people who lose their livelihoods as a result would not be. A very selfish attitude on your part.

Blackburn Rovers prime reason for  existence is not that it provides employment for people but that it provides a life-long experience for the local community---something to identify with and be proud of.

 

[tomphil]

It's primary reason for its existence is football for local people to watch it's amazing how the corporate mindset always seems to trump that.

The employment it provides is important but it's a bonus and we should think how many more would it employ if it was successful. How many did it employ when these lot rocked up and started their managed decline ?

To just exist to employ people and expect the fans to pay for it whist the club stagnates is nonsense because all it's actually doing is providing a platform for a select few in higher office to make a shit load of money out of it for doing not very much.

[Southside Rover]

11 hours ago, simongarnerisgod said:

did i not quote "there will always be a rovers????" therefore there will always be ewood park and jobs for people,in fact there would probably  be more jobs than there is now,we would`nt have the waggot factor cutting expenses and everything else he dreams up

Could you imagine trying to fund the running of Ewood park playing even in National League let alone the base and working the way back up

[chaddyrovers]

6 hours ago, Southside Rover said:

Could you imagine trying to fund the running of Ewood park playing even in National League let alone the base and working the way back up

exactly. To run Rovers take any owner to be willing to fund the club and be willing to accept losses and cover them. Maybe in the future, Venkys might be force to sell the club given the Indian Court case delays again(which the Indian court system seem a mess looking from afar). 

For me, I don't know how far we are from them selling us, but we need to make sure we get owners who understand Rovers, the fan base, be ready to run the club with a CEO who has experience in football and commercial background. I don't know who or even if there is any potential bidders out there for Rovers yet. 

[Mashed Potatoes]

7 hours ago, tomphil said:

It's primary reason for its existence is football for local people to watch it's amazing how the corporate mindset always seems to trump that.

The employment it provides is important but it's a bonus and we should think how many more would it employ if it was successful. How many did it employ when these lot rocked up and started their managed decline ?

To just exist to employ people and expect the fans to pay for it whist the club stagnates is nonsense because all it's actually doing is providing a platform for a select few in higher office to make a shit load of money out of it for doing not very much.

According to the last pre Venkys set of accounts in 2010 there were 253 employees compared with 221 in 2023 so a loss of 32 jobs over those 13 years.

I don't think anybody is suggesting that the club should just exist to provide employment but it seems to me to be callous to be actively hoping for a course of events that will cause some people hardship.

[Mashed Potatoes]

11 hours ago, Upside Down said:

How many have already lost their livelihoods because of venkys?

What about their disastrous effect on the town as a whole?

See my post above.

[47er]

6 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

According to the last pre Venkys set of accounts in 2010 there were 253 employees compared with 221 in 2023 so a loss of 32 jobs over those 13 years.

I don't think anybody is suggesting that the club should just exist to provide employment but it seems to me to be callous to be actively hoping for a course of events that will cause some people hardship.

How many employees were full-time permanent?

[Mashed Potatoes]

Just now, 47er said:

How many employees were full-time permanent?

The accounts don't say.

[wilsdenrover]

7 hours ago, tomphil said:

It's primary reason for its existence is football for local people to watch it's amazing how the corporate mindset always seems to trump that.

The employment it provides is important but it's a bonus and we should think how many more would it employ if it was successful. How many did it employ when these lot rocked up and started their managed decline ?

To just exist to employ people and expect the fans to pay for it whist the club stagnates is nonsense because all it's actually doing is providing a platform for a select few in higher office to make a shit load of money out of it for doing not very much.

2010 vs 2023 - the figures that jump out at me are the drops in commercial (etc) and in maintenance:

[Mattyblue]

It’s terrible for the staff involved, but that’s business, badly run ones go in to administration… however many, many football clubs come out the other side stronger long term.

As these owners won’t ever improve the club and seemingly won’t ever willingly sell, admin seems the only eventuality.

[chaddyrovers]

46 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

2010 vs 2023 - the figures that jump out at me are the drops in commercial (etc) and in maintenance:

from that we have similar levels from 2010 to 2023 in terms of senior players and management but the decrease in Building, ground and pitch maintenance staff plus the commercial, sponsorship, media and merchandising staff is clear to see. 

I guess Rovers outsourced the maintenance work to sub contractors. 

Also why Rovers don't increase sponsorship and commercial income cos of the lack of staff there and I wonder how many people work in the commercial and sponsorship department? Just look at the lack of sponsorship around the ground and its clear to see. The lack of commercial nous at the club is alarming. 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

8 hours ago, Southside Rover said:

Could you imagine trying to fund the running of Ewood park playing even in National League let alone the base and working the way back up

11,328 at Stockport County yesterday.

[Forever Blue]

11 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

11,328 at Stockport County yesterday.

What an achievement that will be if Stockport are playing back in the Championship next season. I remember them being there back when we got promoted under Kenny.