JHRover

Approval given for Coventry to play next season at St Andrew's. So the threats to kick them out of the league were hollow ones as they will agree to relocation to ensure they can fulfil their fixtures. My issue is whether the rental income and receipts through this ground share can be used by Birmingham to offset against Ffp calculations. Given their recent record with the regulations I suspect this extra cash will come in very handy. Question should be whether it is fair on rival clubs that a member can benefit from this arrangement to put them in a stronger position as a result of the league sanctioning this relocation. Convenient solution all round....

I actually don't mind that. It's different. I'd like to see that template applied to our home shirt with halves on the body and those stripes on the sleeves. Derby have got themselves a sponsor that works very well with their shirt though, whereas I still think the problem we will face is successfully incorporating the sponsor.

For all that see Wolves. They got lucky with good rich owners and did what they needed to. Obey the Ffp laws to the letter and you'll likely go nowhere. The clued up owners work around them, ours hide behind them.

I see there's a fuss being made about this 'investment' into recruitment being made. Whilst a positive development I do wonder how significant it is in the scheme of things. A bit like the 'investment' in pitches that Waggott claimed was happening this summer which if spread out across our sites actually doesn't represent very much and is probably the bare minimum upkeep needed to ensure that the facilities are adequate for next season. It's good that they're spending more and taking scouting more seriously but it appears to me that we're now playing catch up after years of neglect whilst rivals have steamed ahead. Thanks to the cost cutting slash and burn approach going hand in hand with complete and utter neglect from the owners and the board down it is baby steps stuff and probably still nowhere near what most rivals are doing every year yet Waggott expects everyone to be impressed as though we are doing something special.

Unfortunately we could have Qatar, Saudi Arabia and China competing to buy us and Venkys would probably refuse to even pick up the phone. We're in the triple lock of being dependent on external funding, being owned by idiots but also the sort of idiots who can afford it and won't entertain selling. All the while rival Championship clubs get bought up by foreign owners and many fans try to convince themselves nobody would be interested in Rovers and Venkys are the best we can hope for.

Looking forward to it. Shame it's a Sunday but might have to book the Monday off work. Going up on the train. Something to look forward to from pre-season at least. Been waiting a long time to go to Ibrox. Don't think there'll be anything to worry about allocation wise going off what it was like for the dingles the other year.

Why does a competition organiser for an English football competition have to meet in sunny Portugal? Back slaps all around as they spend that fine money. Never mind Bury or Bolton, record attendances this year and Sky are paying more!

What sort of people pay £5 million for a mansion on the other side of the world and then never come to stay in it? The sort who have a hell of a lot of money and are quite happy to let it leak into the UK every year.

Just more moving of the goalposts. Same with transfer window targets and expectations. To have sold half of what Blackpool have and a seventh of what relegated to League Two Bradford have so far is awful. Obviously we will see more sold as the summer rolls on but i can't for the life of me see why Rovers or the owners prefer it this way than having your core paid and signed up already.

Sounds to me like a move agreed or very close to being if Waggott is talking about it like that in the paper. Nothing to get excited about. Effectively waving goodbye to Conway and replacing him with Downing. Both well past their best, both free agents, don't imagine Downing will be costing much more at his age. I suppose at least he was playing regularly for a team in the top 6 most of last season...

Looks like they aren't following a 2-3 year plan and signing players to make money off. Want promotion asap and prepared to pay for it. No time for them but they're putting their money where their mouths are rather than trotting out excuses.

There seems to be a belief that it is one or the other - either a gung ho approach in which we spend big money and gamble on getting up or face big problems with Ffp and increased losses - or the slow build in which we spend small amounts each season to try and keep within Ffp rules and that in a few years we should have built towards promotion contention and that if we don't go up everything will be rosy in the garden because we haven't overspent. Problem is though that the slow build concept ignores the likely loss of our best players and difficulty in replacing them, failure to do so would likely see regression. It also ignores that we aren't self sufficient by a long way and every year we are out of the top flight we lose 6 figure amounts. It also ignores that only one other club has been sanctioned for breaking Ffp rules and that whilst spending more carries some more risk, the rewards are greater. The more you spend the greater value the assets are likely to be. Ffp has brought a convenient excuse to Venkys doorstep. If they don't want to spend more that's up to them but just be honest about it. Doing it our way isn't noble or better than others.

In 7 years we must have had 30 loans from Premier League clubs and about 4 who were any good. Cairney, Reed, Gallagher, Keane. They're either hard to find or we aren't very good at picking them but the majority have been a waste of time, space and money. Either way, basing our promotion plans on it is risky. We need a better squad before adding a couple of quality loans. We will struggle to do it paying 5k a week out when WBA are paying 30k.

The 2-3 years from now project is a myth. The only way that will end up is with us selling 2-3 of our best players either to claw some cash back for the owners or because the players get better offers elsewhere and then the whole thing starts again with the excuse being that we are in transition and waiting for new players to settle in. Before you know it you're 5 or 6 years down the line no better off, still hemorrhaging cash trying to find someone else to sell. The sort of mentality that sees a club in the doldrums for decades until or unless you get lucky, like the dingles did with Coyle the buffoon. Doubt Wilder was telling his boys to slow down this season as he has a 2 or 3 year plan. Went out to win every game and got the job done.

As with most transfers the merits or not of paying the asking price will only become clear down the line. It's a gamble but one you have to be prepared to take from time to time if you seek success or big returns on trading. Here and now there's no argument that the Brereton one has been a waste of money. But if he comes good, there's a decent chance yet that one day we will make a profit on him. Same with Gallagher. At his age, with his pedigree, I reckon he'd be worth a punt. No guarantees either way but there are signs it's worth doing. Obviously next question is how much we have overall to spend. If it is £6 million I'm not in favour of spending £5 million of that on Gallagher. If we've £10 million+ (lol) then I'd be doing it. I'd be delighted with a 3 pronged recruitment of Gallagher, Hanley and Reed which would go a long way to sorting things out. Probably talking £10 million + for all 3 though.

Yes, but the fact he mentions it in virtually every article on the owners or our finances suggests he feels it is worth reminding people about, or that it is different somehow to what happens elsewhere.

I suspect it is an orchestrated attempt to convince as many people as possible that operating at a loss is unusual and that Venkys are doing more than they need to or should be expected to by funding it every year. If they don't want to do it then clear off because we ain't going to be self sufficient at this level and there sure as hell isn't anything else they're bringing to the party.

Can someone name me a club without Sky tv/parachute money that DOESNT rely on a benefactor model? There seems to be a belief or attitude coming from somewhere that we are unusual and that everyone else balances the books every year.

Flyers through letterboxes, adverts in the Telegraph/Observer, posters on bus shelters - haven't seen any myself

£10 per adult for a local friendly? In my experience that is standard and any higher would be quite outrageous.

Pretty horrific sales figures as we enter June for a Championship club really. Of course the majority won't be in any rush and will leave it until nearer the season (me included) but it does show how far off the pace we are when the likes of Forest are hitting 20,000 in May and we've sold 2,000.

I get the impression that arranging pre season is just done like everything else at the club. As cheaply and easily as possible. Rather than setting our stall out with some ambition to get games against a couple of decent European sides, try to get some interest going ahead of the season, try to lock horns with a decent side to test ourselves, its much easier to give Rochdale or Bury a call who will be more than grateful for the game with 500+ away fans turning up spending £10-20 a piece. I initially believed it was a result of inexperienced and relatively unknown managers in Kean and Bowyer who didn't have the contacts to sort games out but its been the same under Mowbray. I think the Waggott experiment last season of bringing PL 'giants' to Ewood failed to deliver the full houses he expected and so hence no home games this year. I find myself wondering why they go straight out to Austria in late June to train rather than in early/mid July as most clubs do and we always did traditionally. Is it purely because Mowbray prefers it that way or alternatively is it because it is cheaper to fly out there and book the hotel and facilities that week when other teams don't want to go? The lack of a fixture abroad is disappointing. We appear to be going backwards on that front. Gone are the days of Hughes and Allardyce going abroad and playing 2-3 matches in Germany/Austria. Since 2012 we've had but a handful of fixtures abroad. The 5 games announced so far are extremely dull and uninspiring. It is of course accepted that there will always be 3 or 4 of these lower league local sides but given we've played these sides very recently in the League it doesn't really generate much interest. It's now 2 weeks since Richard Sharpe said the Rangers game was good to go and just a case of rubber stamping the arrangements. I think it is safe to assume a similar approach to pre-season and forward planning as there is with budgets and transfers - nothing incurring significant expense can be done without authorisation from above.

Basically we've now reached a stage where: Anyone over the age of 30 is likely to not be an option for the club, as it doesn't fit Mowbray's self-proclaimed policy of signing younger players who will grow in value. Indeed most people on here would seemingly be pessimistic about any such deal as it brings back memories of Danny Murphy and apparently the policy we 'should' be following is to avoid players on their last legs. Anyone at the young end of the scale or unproven will set alarm bells ringing as it will suggest we're still in the developing players for more money phase and there is immense concern at Mowbray's track record on that front. Anyone who has played regularly at Championship or Premier League level and people will lose their minds about us potentially paying or being expected to pay big wages and we 'shouldn't' be going down that route these days. If we sign someone proven people will get their knickers in a twist about us possibly paying out big wages and being at risk under FFP rules. So what we end up with is all the focus being on players from League One who tick all the boxes e.g. not fresh out of an academy, league experience, cheap - e.g. more Dacks or Rothwells knocking about. Unfortunately that doesn't really stack up with what Mowbray was saying in the aftermath of last season when he said he wanted proven quality who would help us immediately push on towards the top 6 in the Championship.

Carroll and Austin not for me unless they're the icing on the cake. Too old and certainly too injury prone. Given our luck with injuries over the years I expect they'd spend most of their time sat on the treatment table. If we sign someone else plus one of those then fine. Too many eggs in one small basket otherwise. No chance of either really anyway. Too expensive, don't fit the self-proclaimed policy and both will have PL interest. Doubt Mowbray would even want Carroll as his speciality isn't really compatible with Mowbray's approach with no wingers.

Quite sickening reading parts of Mowbray and Waggott's interview in India. Talk of selling Dack and using Burnley as an example of what we are trying to do here. Not what I like to hear in public really, even if that is privately the policy. The big interview and the talk is of trying to copy Burnley and potentially selling your best player. Not exactly going to get the pulses racing is it?