[Archived] Rovers Accounts 2015

[RoverCanada]

These accounts are going to run up to 30 June 2015 so the headline stats being quoted don't apply to the current situation. The finance team prepare the accounts and then they get audited etc and then they get published so there is a long lag. The debt will probably still be there now but the wage to turnover ratio will have drastically changed in the next period that runs up to 30 June 2016.

Aye. So these accounts would still include Rhodes, Cairney, Gestede, Dunn, Robinson, King, etc. (while plus our loan wages, Akpan, Guthre, Ward, Bennett, Jackson this year...) and won't include the £20M+ in transfer fees we've received since. Plus hopefully our payoffs to the likes of Givet, Vukcevic, etc. will have run out by now... (while the likes of Best and Kean may still be draining the accounts now, hurray)

Would be interesting if someone with too much time on their hands could put together a times series of the key numbers from the Rovers accounts over the past 4-5 years... Would give an idea of how Rovers are projecting...

[J*B]

Is anyone not involved in the trust going to review the accounts do we know?

I don't mean that as any disrespect but I would prefer someone without a story to tell as such and from a neutral starting point.

You have to believe on the surface it is getting better - if not then there's something else going on.

Just so I'm understanding this, the Rovers Trust take a fee from their members every year for... well for being a member. They have the accounts, could release them at any point to their membership, but we are waiting for Dan to get back from his Easter holiday before they are released? Wouldn't it be more sensible to release them as soon as they are available and if The Trust/Dan wants to do a review it's released as and when? How many people that visit this forum alone do you think are qualified to look over the accounts the day they are released and draw their own conclusions? At least that way we can discuss with a selection of opinions and debate rather than waiting and speculating?

[1arC]

Just so I'm understanding this, the Rovers Trust take a fee from their members every year for... well for being a member. They have the accounts, could release them at any point to their membership, but we are waiting for Dan to get back from his Easter holiday before they are released? Wouldn't it be more sensible to release them as soon as they are available and if The Trust/Dan wants to do a review it's released as and when? How many people that visit this forum alone do you think are qualified to look over the accounts the day they are released and draw their own conclusions? At least that way we can discuss with a selection of opinions and debate rather than waiting and speculating?

Mercerman is an accountant, unless I am very much mistaken and is qualified to dissect and make sense of them. He normally makes them more understandable than anyone else, in my view.

[VinjayV4]

Anyone on here who's a shareholder besides members of the Rovers trust?

[MCMC1875]

Just so I'm understanding this, the Rovers Trust take a fee from their members every year for... well for being a member. They have the accounts, could release them at any point to their membership, but we are waiting for Dan to get back from his Easter holiday before they are released? Wouldn't it be more sensible to release them as soon as they are available and if The Trust/Dan wants to do a review it's released as and when? How many people that visit this forum alone do you think are qualified to look over the accounts the day they are released and draw their own conclusions? At least that way we can discuss with a selection of opinions and debate rather than waiting and speculating?

Well I could do it.

[K-Hod]

Mercerman is an accountant, unless I am very much mistaken and is qualified to dissect and make sense of them. He normally makes them more understandable than anyone else, in my view.

I can think of least a few accountants that post on here!

[AdamRochina]

Can't find any info on it but has venkys wiped 87 mill of debt ..or not wipes but owned to them

[Baz]

Can't find any info on it but has venkys wiped 87 mill of debt ..or not wipes but owned to them

Rovers are in debt of just over £100m, of which c.£87m is owed to Venkys on an interest free basis, but still owed.

[pk1875]

These figures dont include the sales of Gestede or Rhodes I dont think.

[AdamRochina]

Cheers guys

[J*B]

These figures dont include the sales of Gestede or Rhodes I dont think.

We'll have to wait for Dan to come back from his holidays.

[VinjayV4]

We'll have to wait for Dan to come back from his holidays.

Just get in the way don't they...

[awhom111]

Aye. So these accounts would still include Rhodes, Cairney, Gestede, Dunn, Robinson, King, etc. (while plus our loan wages, Akpan, Guthre, Ward, Bennett, Jackson this year...) and won't include the £20M+ in transfer fees we've received since. Plus hopefully our payoffs to the likes of Givet, Vukcevic, etc. will have run out by now... (while the likes of Best and Kean may still be draining the accounts now, hurray)

Would be interesting if someone with too much time on their hands could put together a times series of the key numbers from the Rovers accounts over the past 4-5 years... Would give an idea of how Rovers are projecting...

I have some of the figures in a file.

Here are the costs of our transfers for example:

2009-2010: 14,363,805

2010-2011: 5,905,057

2011-2012: 16,760,993

2012-2013: 16,254,907

2013-2014: 4,375,669

The accounts themselves will only include July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015. Unfortunately, when they take all the way up to the deadline to release the accounts, memories get foggy about what happened nearly two years ago now. Last cycle they at least managed to get them released by the end of the calendar year. Any significant events that happened after that date and before the date of the accounts will be disclosed. That means that we will at least have an idea about Gestede's transfer and maybe more if they were really late.

[92er]

Rovers are in debt of just over £100m, of which c.£87m is owed to Venkys on an interest free basis, but still owed.

Didn't Venkys convert some of, or all of, their debt into shares to get us out of financial restrictions?

Anyone on here who's a shareholder besides members of the Rovers trust?

Yes.

[chaddyrovers]

LT report on the account

http://m.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/14390631.Annual_losses_improve_by___24_9m_but_Blackburn_Rovers__debt_hits___104_2m/

[tomphil]

Didn't Venkys convert some of, or all of, their debt into shares to get us out of financial restrictions?

Yes.

Nope just a 3 mill loan which maybe was one with a payback clause. The rest is owed to them with no payback dates or interest. Where the hell it comes from who knows but it hasn't totally been written off. If it was it would probably indicate being put up for sale but other than that I suppose they don't need to write it off.

[JHRover]

Basically we're now in a 'Bolton situation' where we have hit 'debts' of more than £100 million and were are solely reliant on the whim of our majority shareholders to keep the club in existence. Like at our neighbours the vast majority of the club's debt is to the shareholders and for as long as they don't seek repayment then the club is fine. Fortunately there has been no indication over the last 4 years that Venkys have or will seek immediate repayment of some of that money and the language used in the accounts is the same as in previous years - that the owners remain committed to funding the club for the next 12 month period.

A bigger threat at this stage isn't the £87 million owed to Venkys, but the other amount that is owed to the Bank of India. However it appears that the Bank are content to continue to supply the overdraft money which suggests they have a good relationship with Venkys and they anticipate the overdraft facility being renewed again as it has every year. This money appears to come into the club as an offshoot of Venkys interests in India.

This is a similar situation to at Bolton. In the end it wasn't the debts of £170odd million to Davies that saw the club unravel. Davies knew he wasn't getting that money back and 'wrote it off'. The problem at Bolton came when Davies ran out of money or ran out of wanting to spend it on a loss making Championship club, and then the smaller debts such as those to loan companies and HMRC began to drag the club towards administration.

The chances of Venkys seeking repayment of their 'loans'? Well they could try, but surely they will know by now that they only way they are ever going to see that £87 million again is by getting promoted. They could bring a fire sale to Ewood Park, reduce the club to a shell and not recoup half of that money. It just isn't there.

I just wonder who these people are who can work their way through a £100 million+ 'investment' and still not see the need for a strong, independent board of directors at the club.

[tomphil]

At least the V's empire is still a going concern so they must be generating spare money to throw at it. Not sure what the situation was with Davies but wasn't he retired and maybe seeing his money drain away ?

That's about the only difference though.........

[JHRover]

I think Davies was looking to sell up and retire as he approaches his 70th birthday and his family were putting pressure on him to scale down his commitments and rather than see their inheritance eaten up on Wanderers they wanted him to put it elsewhere.

I suppose to our possible benefit Venkys seem to have a lot more money and a more successful, growing business empire which should see them continue to make significant amounts from the core business. Not sure this was the case with Davies but I thought he had stopped with his other business interests.

Also important is that we are owned by a company which is in turn owned by 4 family members. This should provide more of a safety net than if we were owned outright by one individual. Obviously this means that even if one or two get cold feet and want to stop subsidising the club, presumably it will take agreement from all four for them to pull the plug or put the club up for sale, whereas at Bolton and most other clubs their future is wholly dependent on the wishes and condition of one man.

[punerover]

The listed company in India isnt doing so well recently. They have posted losses over the last couple of quarters. It was a very very profitable company and its the first time in years that they have posted losses. If anyone wants to check

www.bseindia.com and www.nseindia.com and search for Venkys or Venkateshwara Hatcheries Limited.

[ABBEY]

Oh man hail the venkyscum . What a lovely debt . The sooner they F off the sooner we can rebuild from wherever .

How much debt is acceptable to us ?

100m 200mor 100000m

#venkyscumout

[RoverCanada]

I have some of the figures in a file.

Here are the costs of our transfers for example:

2009-2010: 14,363,805

2010-2011: 5,905,057

2011-2012: 16,760,993

2012-2013: 16,254,907

2013-2014: 4,375,669

The accounts themselves will only include July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015. Unfortunately, when they take all the way up to the deadline to release the accounts, memories get foggy about what happened nearly two years ago now. Last cycle they at least managed to get them released by the end of the calendar year. Any significant events that happened after that date and before the date of the accounts will be disclosed. That means that we will at least have an idea about Gestede's transfer and maybe more if they were really late.

Ah, cheers.

Okay so they may disclose transfer fees received after that 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015 window, but the headline numbers would only include wages + transfers within that window? Looking back, Cairney's sale was 26 June, so I guess the initial fee would be included, but I guess it depends on how the transfer fees are structured (which is pertinent for the rumour that we don't get the Rhodes money until next year's accounts!). Gestede's sale was 31 July, so I don't think it would be included.

I'd guess we wanted most of those transfers and subtracted wages to be credited to the 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016 accounts given that projection is likely what got us out of the embargo? I'm no accountant, and how they depreciate player valuations and transfer fees can make this all quite obscure!

edit: taking a look at LT's article, they do seem to confirm Cairney's transfer is included given our £3.5M profit on player sales, while from June to November, we've netted £7.8M, largely from Gestede and King.

Turnover down from £30.4M to £22.4M largely due to £8.8M drop in media income due to reduction of parachute payments. Nothing to do about that. Wages still quite high at £26.9M (that would put us roughly 7th in the league compared to league-wide numbers for 2013-14), but that's down from £34.5M. 'Other' operating expenses being cut too - £11.6M down from £19.8M, so whatever those £8.2M of savings entail, they're cutting where they can...

Perhaps the most 'encouraging' number I see is expenses on 'player disposals', which I assume means contract termination payoffs, was only £300k, down from £6.6M.

[tomphil]

The listed company in India isnt doing so well recently. They have posted losses over the last couple of quarters. It was a very very profitable company and its the first time in years that they have posted losses. If anyone wants to check

www.bseindia.com and www.nseindia.com and search for Venkys or Venkateshwara Hatcheries Limited.

I read a bit back that it was also run largely on big debt. They are either extremely clever or have a secret oil well in the back garden !

[K-Hod]

Oh man hail the venkyscum . What a lovely debt . The sooner they F off the sooner we can rebuild from wherever .

How much debt is acceptable to us ?

100m 200mor 100000m

#venkyscumout

I didn't see anyone hailing anything. It would of course be better to have zero debt, but it's also better to have a club to support for me.

[ABBEY]

Where did say anyone was hailing venkys ? It was a statement not an accusation . Don't get your knickers in a twist .

So you would be happy to rack up say 10000m and then leave ? Every day the debt increases