January Transfer window

[JBiz]

45 minutes ago, Emerald Isle Rover said:

Your last paragraph is the issue venkys have a net worth of around 2billion 

they don’t care for rovers 

they have zero ambition 

We want rid of them, why would you want them to put more money in?

[aletheia]

2 hours ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

However it is what it is.

A phrase to cover all lack of ambition and maintain the status quo.

[aletheia]

2 hours ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

The owners are currently owed circa £ 135 million by the club / company.

The owners commit to topping up a £ 21 million turnover business by £ 17.million to cover the operating losses each year,. 

The owners lose 45k per day keeping us operating at this level

Nearly all football clubs lose money.

Assuming your figures are correct, it is hardly a dent in the Rao's company  which is worth around £2billion.

The Raos themselves expect success in the long term, whatever the sceptics say.
'Our goals are simple,' says Venkatesh Rao, 45, who co-owns the VH Group with brother Balaji, 38, and sister Anuradha.
'We want to keep the fans happy and make the club better.
'As and when required, we will invest, in a responsible way, but let me be clear: money will not be a problem. I am not going to promise specific figures but if we need to spend £5m on something, we'll spend it. If we need £10m, £15m, £20m, we'll do it. We won't compromise on quality. We are prepared to spend a lot over time.'

 

[roversinmyblood]

Adam Armstrong seems to be on the bench at Southampton most of the time, would he be available for a loan? I very much doubt it, but that would be an epic loan as he is lethal in the championship. 

[aletheia]

2 hours ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

The business is not financially viable.

Again most football clubs aren't. But most (except the duff ones) choose to reinvest wisely and do a certain amount of careful speculation for accumulation/success.

Perhaps they could sell a few cars?

Demonstrably they have money to invest where they see fit.
'Four-wheelers are my only extravagance,' says Venkatesh, or Venky to friends, slightly abashed at his admission as we talk in the family's marbled, high-security bungalow complex in the hills above Pune.
There are five top-end cars in the courtyard outside.
There are 69 others on the driveway and in the garage. Venky has 'only' 23 motors.
Balaji, pony-tailed, open-shirted and adorned with golden jewellery and a holstered pistol - imported, licensed and loaded - boasts 51 vehicles, including a Rolls-Royce, a Bentley and a new customised £100,000 Hummer.

 

Edited 6 hours ago by aletheia

[aletheia]

Their (the Raos) philanthropy includes free hospitals, schools and daily food handouts for Pune's poor.

But not Rovers.

Edited 6 hours ago by aletheia

[aletheia]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

All gone a bit pear shaped for the owners, hasn’t it.. But no point changing course, just keep hold of it for another 15 years.

I think Balaji's son is around 30.
 

[aletheia]

1 hour ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

Anyway it's not rocket science. We are skint, unless the owners decide to wax their own money in ever increasing amounts.

Chicken feed for them and no doubt can be offset elsewhere.

[JBiz]

@aletheia

Gueye, Ohashi and Cantwell are already worth a lot more than we paid for them and it’s very early days.

They came from spending a small amount, from selling a player we paid £3m for approx 3x that.

This is what these clubs “not the duff ones” as you put it do.

All the stuff about Venkys wealth has nothing to do with that.
 

Do you want rid or do you want them to bankroll us to an even higher level of investment, because the figures that OOJW used are as close to reality as I would understand.

 

 

[aletheia]

Rid but no signs.

I question the amounts put in but even if the case it cannot possibly be hurting the Raos personally.

Nobody is saying spend 20-30 mill on a player (although that would be easy for them) but the signs are of a total lack of interest in the club from the owners bar keeping the lights on. They have stumbled on a manager who is working miracles. A modicum of player investment could reap rewards down the line. That is what owing a football club is about. Of course, championship sides have to cut their cloth but do you really think that if any other side in this League had owners worth £2billion, they wouldn't be spending it more than we are?

The worst of all worlds-limbo.

I do not accept the narrative that 'it is what it is' and we should accept it.

[roversfan99]

14 minutes ago, JBiz said:

@aletheia

Gueye, Ohashi and Cantwell are already worth a lot more than we paid for them and it’s very early days.

They came from spending a small amount, from selling a player we paid £3m for approx 3x that.

This is what these clubs “not the duff ones” as you put it do.

All the stuff about Venkys wealth has nothing to do with that.
 

Do you want rid or do you want them to bankroll us to an even higher level of investment, because the figures that OOJW used are as close to reality as I would understand.

 

 

If those 3 are now worth more than we paid, which Im not convinced about but I suppose the combined fees were very low to begin with. Surely that only strengthens the argument that investing in fees can REDUCE the amount of investment needed. 

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

14 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

The quality signings will happened in the later days of the window. Never early window

If we had any quality signings lined up, they would be in by now. 

We are just waiting to see which prem loans may be offered our way or whether another champ side, in need of a good striker, will offload one of their duds to us on the cheap. 

[wilsdenrover]

If nothing happens early in the window, why not just shorten it? 🤔

[wilsdenrover]

3 minutes ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

If we had any quality signings lined up, they would be in by now. 

We are just waiting to see which prem loans may be offered our way or whether another champ side, in need of a good striker, will offload one of their duds to us on the cheap. 

We’re in the club, we’ve eyed up a few, now we’re just waiting for 5 to 2 to see what’s left. 

Edited 5 hours ago by wilsdenrover

[Makrover]

Thomas Asante starts for Coventry 

 

[simongarnerisgod]

it`s going like the previous january windows is`nt it??,wait till the last day, then have an unfortunate incident with the administration,if i was eustace id`e get out as soon as possible,to good a coach to be associating with the guttersnipe that run rovers

[AJW]

Like the look of the Aasgaard chap and if the 2.5m clause is right we could have a decent ROI on him if he perform well here , problem I see (apart from the obvious)  is how you put him and Cantwell in same team as they look quite similar 

Edited 5 hours ago by AJW

[Blow-in]

3 hours ago, islander200 said:

Cornett is going to Genoa

Makes sense, they love their Ice-cream in Italy.

[JBiz]

42 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

If those 3 are now worth more than we paid, which Im not convinced about but I suppose the combined fees were very low to begin with. Surely that only strengthens the argument that investing in fees can REDUCE the amount of investment needed. 

Forgetting that you’ve always been harsh on players, If our club needs to find an extra 15/20m  of income a season just to break even, investing all of your transfer income would mean there’s still a black hole, so you’d need to sell someone to keep the lights on. Investing money doesn’t simply mean = reward.

Regardless of posters telling us FFP only exists for those without ambition, if you’re haemorrhaging cash, you’re haemorrhaging talent if you’re not  promoted. We should know, it’s happening every season. With a transfer embargo we wouldn’t even be able to replace with modest sums (as we have recently).

If we invested 50% of our transfer income and kept the wage bill exactly the same, you’d still need to sell 30m a season to get near to the amount necessary to avoid the owners putting cash in.

If we’re happy to let the owners continue to cover that shortfall (I personally can’t think of anything worse), I’d imagine we will spend between 25/50% of our player receipts anyway - judging by last summer that was the case.
 

Also there are agreements we might not be privy too, Adam Wharton’s deal (which was a lacklustre fee ) has been structured over 5 years too, we wouldn’t know without seeing the figures, how much of that Raya bonus, or the smods and Gally money we’ve seen so far.

Final key caveat  btw - wage bill. The minute we’re in a tangle for a player who is available and likely proven to succeed in the league, we’d have to smash our entire wage system to even come near to any parachute payment club if they’re interested. Remember Anel Ahmehodzic or whatever he’s called?

Final point I would make is look at the eye watering sums that leeds and Burnley made in selling players last summer, look at the talent they still have and the sums they’ve reinvested. There is no fair playing field in the champ.

[Exiled_Rover]

37 minutes ago, Makrover said:

Thomas Asante starts for Coventry 

 

Looks like Lampard has doubled down on his statements then. 

[ben_the_beast]

2 hours ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

17 million losses x 2 years = 34 million.

Minus Wharton 18 rising to 22 million, Sammie 9 million plus add ons, Raya 5 million.

18 + 9 + 5 = 32 million.

Plus increased TV revenue = small profit.

Ben iif your £ 135.00 million down over 13 years, then make £ 2 million in year 14 do you believe you are now in profit? Plus you need the 2 mullion to help offset the next 12 months 17 million losses.

Anyway it's not rocket science. We are skint, unless the owners decide to wax their own money in ever increasing amounts.

There's no need to be so condescending. I quite clearly wasn't stating their purchase of the club has been a profitable acquisition. I was simply pointing out that they are not currently pumping in £20 odd million a year in our current situation and haven't done for some time. This is what your original post alluded. 

Your final paragraph is exactly why I and the majority of others are making the counter argument. Modest reinvestment of funds spent wisely creates assets, meaning the levels of investment required, even just to tread water are lower. 

It's not rocket science mate!

[roversfan99]

5 minutes ago, JBiz said:

Forgetting that you’ve always been harsh on players, If our club needs to find an extra 15/20m  of income a season just to break even, investing all of your transfer income would mean there’s still a black hole, so you’d need to sell someone to keep the lights on. Investing money doesn’t simply mean = reward.

Regardless of posters telling us FFP only exists for those without ambition, if you’re haemorrhaging cash, you’re haemorrhaging talent if you’re not  promoted. We should know, it’s happening every season. With a transfer embargo we wouldn’t even be able to replace with modest sums (as we have recently).

If we invested 50% of our transfer income and kept the wage bill exactly the same, you’d still need to sell 30m a season to get near to the amount necessary to avoid the owners putting cash in.

If we’re happy to let the owners continue to cover that shortfall (I personally can’t think of anything worse), I’d imagine we will spend between 25/50% of our player receipts anyway - judging by last summer that was the case.
 

Also there are agreements we might not be privy too, Adam Wharton’s deal (which was a lacklustre fee ) has been structured over 5 years too, we wouldn’t know without seeing the figures, how much of that Raya bonus, or the smods and Gally money we’ve seen so far.

Final key caveat  btw - wage bill. The minute we’re in a tangle for a player who is available and likely proven to succeed in the league, we’d have to smash our entire wage system to even come near to any parachute payment club if they’re interested. Remember Anel Ahmehodzic or whatever he’s called?

Final point I would make is look at the eye watering sums that leeds and Burnley made in selling players last summer, look at the talent they still have and the sums they’ve reinvested. There is no fair playing field in the champ.

I have never said we should invest ALL transfer income. Its a strawman argument, no one has.

The whole purpose of being a trading club is buying assets, selling them at a profit, reinvesting SOME of the proceeds and continuing.

The objective cant be to not need ANY money invested by the owners. Its practically impossible. Point being, reinvesting a reasonable % of proceeds allows you to continue to trade, make profit on sales and reduce losses while benefitting from a better team in the meantime. And you will sign duds along the way, 

And again, no one is asking to sign anyone to smash our wage ceiling.

And on timings of payments. We would similarly be paying fees in installments.

And we did not spend 25%-50% of fees. Around £2m of £10m would have us at 20% but thats ignoring the Wharton sale.

[JBiz]

12 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I have never said we should invest ALL transfer income. Its a strawman argument, no one has.

The whole purpose of being a trading club is buying assets, selling them at a profit, reinvesting SOME of the proceeds and continuing.

The objective cant be to not need ANY money invested by the owners. Its practically impossible. Point being, reinvesting a reasonable % of proceeds allows you to continue to trade, make profit on sales and reduce losses while benefitting from a better team in the meantime. And you will sign duds along the way, 

And again, no one is asking to sign anyone to smash our wage ceiling.

And on timings of payments. We would similarly be paying fees in installments.

And we did not spend 25%-50% of fees. Around £2m of £10m would have us at 20% but thats ignoring the Wharton sale.

If you believe we signed; Gueye, Ohashi, Weimann, Ba’ath, Cantwell, Toth for less than 2m then Im stumped.

That also doesn’t take into account any loan fees paid for Baker, ACD and Beck. Loans aren’t an “investment” but find us three players as good as that for less than 10m and you’d be world class scout.

My personal guess would’ve been that we spent around 5m last summer, which if you include 5m from an instalment on Wharton, that’s probably 33%.
 

[Mike E]

48 minutes ago, AJW said:

Like the look of the Aasgaard chap and if the 2.5m clause is right we could have a decent ROI on him if he perform well here , problem I see (apart from the obvious)  is how you put him and Cantwell in same team as they look quite similar 

Confusing the opposition was a prime Kean tactic, employing both Olson twins down the left ‘to confuse opposing right backs’ 😭

[RoversClitheroe]

3 hours ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

17 million losses x 2 years = 34 million.

Minus Wharton 18 rising to 22 million, Sammie 9 million plus add ons, Raya 5 million.

18 + 9 + 5 = 32 million.

Plus increased TV revenue = small profit.

Ben iif your £ 135.00 million down over 13 years, then make £ 2 million in year 14 do you believe you are now in profit? Plus you need the 2 mullion to help offset the next 12 months 17 million losses.

Anyway it's not rocket science. We are skint, unless the owners decide to wax their own money in ever increasing amounts.

You heard the term "sunk costs"