Venky’s (& Suhail) Out Protest Ideas

[davulsukur]

2 minutes ago, KentExile said:

far from perfect, but basically yes

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/einnahmenausgaben/wettbewerb/GB2/plus/0?ids=a&sa=&saison_id=2010&saison_id_bis=2025&nat=&pos=&altersklasse=&w_s=&leihe=&intern=0

 

#	Club		Expenditure	Arrivals	Income	Departures	balance
1		Swansea City	€308.57m	345	€394.08m	351	€85.51m
2		Blackburn Rovers	€91.02m	376	€163.26m	388	€72.23m
3		Bristol City	€101.47m	384	€146.88m	381	€45.42m
4		Peterborough United	€26.28m	473	€67.42m	479	€41.14m
5		Wigan Athletic	€76.89m	445	€111.09m	439	€34.20m
6		Watford FC	€400.63m	467	€434.47m	466	€33.83m
7		Barnsley FC	€26.90m	469	€55.87m	466	€28.97m
8		Milton Keynes Dons	€4.04m	429	€21.43m	429	€17.39m
9		Blackpool FC	€13.39m	508	€28.42m	514	€15.03m
10		Oxford United	€5.92m	433	€19.48m	421	€13.56m
11		Portsmouth FC	€16.60m	478	€29.25m	479	€12.65m
12		Charlton Athletic	€29.80m	488	€42.26m	485	€12.46m
13		Reading FC	€71.14m	398	€81.90m	400	€10.76m
14		Plymouth Argyle	€11.11m	411	€20.29m	413	€9.18m
15		Rotherham United	€6.38m	476	€13.75m	471	€7.37m
16		Preston North End	€26.12m	396	€32.47m	392	€6.35m
17		Bolton Wanderers	€31.93m	429	€36.94m	438	€5.01m
18		Doncaster Rovers	€1.78m	467	€6.79m	465	€5.01m
19		Birmingham City	€136.20m	437	€140.90m	438	€4.70m
20		Wycombe Wanderers	€1.92m	405	€5.78m	403	€3.87m
21		Scunthorpe United	€2.11m	472	€5.88m	477	€3.78m
22		Coventry City	€71.33m	366	€74.41m	370	€3.09m
23		Burton Albion	€2.04m	482	€4.98m	477	€2.93m
24		Hull City	€228.74m	436	€231.53m	438	€2.79m
25		Yeovil Town	-	501	€760k	506	€760k

Ah that must have been what I saw. 

Thanks!

[StHelensRover]

2 minutes ago, KentExile said:

far from perfect, but basically yes

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/einnahmenausgaben/wettbewerb/GB2/plus/0?ids=a&sa=&saison_id=2010&saison_id_bis=2025&nat=&pos=&altersklasse=&w_s=&leihe=&intern=0

 

#	Club		Expenditure	Arrivals	Income	Departures	balance
1		Swansea City	€308.57m	345	€394.08m	351	€85.51m
2		Blackburn Rovers	€91.02m	376	€163.26m	388	€72.23m
3		Bristol City	€101.47m	384	€146.88m	381	€45.42m
4		Peterborough United	€26.28m	473	€67.42m	479	€41.14m
5		Wigan Athletic	€76.89m	445	€111.09m	439	€34.20m
6		Watford FC	€400.63m	467	€434.47m	466	€33.83m
7		Barnsley FC	€26.90m	469	€55.87m	466	€28.97m
8		Milton Keynes Dons	€4.04m	429	€21.43m	429	€17.39m
9		Blackpool FC	€13.39m	508	€28.42m	514	€15.03m
10		Oxford United	€5.92m	433	€19.48m	421	€13.56m
11		Portsmouth FC	€16.60m	478	€29.25m	479	€12.65m
12		Charlton Athletic	€29.80m	488	€42.26m	485	€12.46m
13		Reading FC	€71.14m	398	€81.90m	400	€10.76m
14		Plymouth Argyle	€11.11m	411	€20.29m	413	€9.18m
15		Rotherham United	€6.38m	476	€13.75m	471	€7.37m
16		Preston North End	€26.12m	396	€32.47m	392	€6.35m
17		Bolton Wanderers	€31.93m	429	€36.94m	438	€5.01m
18		Doncaster Rovers	€1.78m	467	€6.79m	465	€5.01m
19		Birmingham City	€136.20m	437	€140.90m	438	€4.70m
20		Wycombe Wanderers	€1.92m	405	€5.78m	403	€3.87m
21		Scunthorpe United	€2.11m	472	€5.88m	477	€3.78m
22		Coventry City	€71.33m	366	€74.41m	370	€3.09m
23		Burton Albion	€2.04m	482	€4.98m	477	€2.93m
24		Hull City	€228.74m	436	€231.53m	438	€2.79m
25		Yeovil Town	-	501	€760k	506	€760k

This goes to show how difficult it is to grow and achieve with a football club using the 'Brighton' model. You can keep selling players for more than you paid, but in our case the club has stagnated while that has happened. Clubs like Brighton. Brentford, the dingles, have bought cheap, sold high and progressed the league position of the club. To do that, you have to keep reinvesting the money wisely and appointing smart football people. We've done none of that. It's all on the owners and reason 358 that they need to go.

[KentExile]

14 minutes ago, StHelensRover said:

This goes to show how difficult it is to grow and achieve with a football club using the 'Brighton' model. You can keep selling players for more than you paid, but in our case the club has stagnated while that has happened. Clubs like Brighton. Brentford, the dingles, have bought cheap, sold high and progressed the league position of the club. To do that, you have to keep reinvesting the money wisely and appointing smart football people. We've done none of that. It's all on the owners and reason 358 that they need to go.

The Brighton model (when they were promoted from the Championship) involved spending more than they received, which can be done under FFP rules as fees spent are divided over the course of a contract where fees received are counted as 1 singular payment, even then, I seem to recall (correct me if I am wrong) that Brighton would have been in trouble for breaching rules had they not gone up, such was the extent of their overspend

Rovers do the polar opposite

Brentford, Coventry, Middlesbrough etc operate/operated closer to a player trading model, although all invest a much higher proportion of monies from player sales than Rovers

Edited 11 hours ago by KentExile

[StHelensRover]

13 minutes ago, KentExile said:

The Brighton model involved spending more than they received, as did Brentford, which can be done under FFP rules as fees spent are divided over the course of a contract where fees received are counted as 1 singular payment

Rovers do the polar opposite

Tony Bloom probably the best/most successful club owner in the last 15 years. Local man done good. Transformed Brighton from a league one club into an established premier league team that qualified for Europe. Very smart man who brought in a load of other very smart people and worked hard to create a club which looks nothing like the one he bought. 

In the last 15 years our owners have completely transformed our club, in the  opposite manner. No smart people, no good decision making. Shebby Singh, Suhail Pasha, Shaw, Agnew, Gestede et al. Steve Waggott looks like Jeff Bezos against that list. Appalling.

 

Edited 11 hours ago by StHelensRover

[davulsukur]

13 minutes ago, StHelensRover said:

This goes to show how difficult it is to grow and achieve with a football club using the 'Brighton' model. You can keep selling players for more than you paid, but in our case the club has stagnated while that has happened. Clubs like Brighton. Brentford, the dingles, have bought cheap, sold high and progressed the league position of the club. To do that, you have to keep reinvesting the money wisely and appointing smart football people. We've done none of that. It's all on the owners and reason 358 that they need to go.

I always assumed, though could be wrong, that clubs like Brighton, Brentford etc. started off buying players for lower fee's, selling those for good money, using that money to buy more expensive players than the first lot cost, sell those, reinvest, rinse, repeat.

So like, you'd buy a player for £2m, sell for £10m, then buy a player for say £5m out of the profit, sell for £20m etc. etc.

(they are example figures that i've just made up)

Rovers just wanna buy for £500k, sell for a profit and then buy more players for £500k.

[KentExile]

2 minutes ago, davulsukur said:

I always assumed, though could be wrong, that clubs like Brighton, Brentford etc. started off buying players for lower fee's, selling those for good money, using that money to buy more expensive players than the first lot cost, sell those, reinvest, rinse, repeat.

So like, you'd buy a player for £2m, sell for £10m, then buy a player for say £5m out of the profit, sell for £20m etc. etc.

(they are example figures that i've just made up)

Rovers just wanna buy for £500k, sell for a profit and then buy more players for £500k.

not just fees, Brighton/Brentford etc also used money in to increase the wage budget

[Penwortham Blue]

3 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

1. There plainly isn’t common ground across the whole of the fanbase - I sense it’s another Devil’s Ratio of 52:48 TBH - the Coalition is representing their constituency

2. No credible buyer will engage with fans - they’d approach the current owners, the more credible, the less we’d know of them

I think you’re badly wrong there Herbie. The Coalition might not be representative of all Rovers fans but my guess is that it is more 90/10 -85/15 territory. I think if you asked every Blackburn Rovers fan whether they wanted their club to be run better, by new owners, you would struggle to find a single dissenting voice.

[StHelensRover]

4 minutes ago, Penwortham Blue said:

I think you’re badly wrong there Herbie. The Coalition might not be representative of all Rovers fans but my guess is that it is more 90/10 -85/15 territory. I think if you asked every Blackburn Rovers fan whether they wanted their club to be run better, by new owners, you would struggle to find a single dissenting voice.

I think it's actually somewhere in-between. Because while I think probably 90% of fans dislike the owners and are really frustrated with them, a sizeable portion of those are also too risk averse to want a change of ownership, that's where we get the "I don't like them but at least they're putting the money in, we could be another Bury, no one will buy us" comments. That sizeable group of people dislike the owners, but will either never protest, or will only protest once we're bottom of League One. Those are the ones we need to convince regarding a boycott. We need to convince them that it is worth rolling the dice with new owners. Edit- I don't have an answer about how to do this, especially after 15 years of nonsense.

Edited 11 hours ago by StHelensRover

[Herbie6590]

8 minutes ago, Penwortham Blue said:

I think you’re badly wrong there Herbie. The Coalition might not be representative of all Rovers fans but my guess is that it is more 90/10 -85/15 territory. I think if you asked every Blackburn Rovers fan whether they wanted their club to be run better, by new owners, you would struggle to find a single dissenting voice.

It’s how you phrase the question(s)…for those of a certain age there’s a “Yes Prime Minister” episode in which Sir Humphrey illustrates the conundrum beautifully.

I’ll try & parody it…badly…

 

“Are you worried that Blackburn Rovers will fold without generous owners?”

”Do you agree that to be competitive in the Championship you need owners with deep pockets?”

”Do you think that calling for Venky’s to leave risks Rovers future?”

 

versus…

 

”Do you agree that football without hope means nothing?”

”Do you agree that success in a lower division would galvanise a latent Rovers fanbase?”

”Do you think the club could be run by better, new owners than Venky’s?”

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

We're all asking the questions that need to be asked,genuine fans who care and are fearful for the future of this Club....

We are being met with Silence,we are still waiting for answers.

[Herbie6590]

4 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

It’s how you phrase the question(s)…for those of a certain age there’s a “Yes Prime Minister” episode in which Sir Humphrey illustrates the conundrum beautifully.

I’ll try & parody it…badly…

 

“Are you worried that Blackburn Rovers will fold without generous owners?”

”Do you agree that to be competitive in the Championship you need owners with deep pockets?”

”Do you think that calling for Venky’s to leave risks Rovers future?”

 

versus…

 

”Do you agree that football without hope means nothing?”

”Do you agree that success in a lower division would galvanise a latent Rovers fanbase?”

”Do you think the club could be run by better, new owners than Venky’s?”

Here it is…

 

[Mattyblue]

Far more than 10% are content enough for the owners to stay.

[Rogerb]

2 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Far more than 10% are content enough for the owners to stay.

Probably so but I wouldn't think they are in the majority and if you include all those who have walked away since 2011 then there are perhaps at most 5000 attending who for whatever reason are content enough.

[roverblue]

14 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Far more than 10% are content enough for the owners to stay.

Agree, the match going home fans that remain I rarely hear much dissent about the Venkys other than the odd chant when we start losing. We have lost the real dissenters from attending over the years which is fair enough, I will probably join them next season.

[DE.]

A significant portion of those still attending Ewood will be most loyal / apathetic towards the ownership. The majority of those who have had enough are already boycotting, albeit unofficially. It's why a boycott call now is so difficult for the Coalition - for those who agree with them, you're preaching to the choir and those people are probably, mostly, not attending anyway. That leaves you with the remaining group who will be very hard to convince to take action. It's not an enviable task. 

Granted there are a few on here who go but would boycott for the cause, as we've seen. I sadly think they are in the minority though - even if we're just talking a single game. 

[Penwortham Blue]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

Far more than 10% are content enough for the owners to stay.

I don’t think they are happy or indeed, content for them to stay. They just aren’t prepared to do anything in an attempt to get them removed.

Edited 9 hours ago by Penwortham Blue

[...]

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/sheffield-wednesday-told-to-avoid-doing-one-thing-for-blackburn-rovers-match/

 

Wednesday helping out

[MarkBRFC]

Just now, ... said:

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/sheffield-wednesday-told-to-avoid-doing-one-thing-for-blackburn-rovers-match/

 

Wednesday helping out

Just won't happen.

When there and in the moment, when they are in the concourse 90% of fans will buy something without giving it a second thought.

[...]

OK. Just posting it. 

[Elrovers]

16 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

Just won't happen.

When there and in the moment, when they are in the concourse 90% of fans will buy something without giving it a second thought.

Well they understand the position we are in, and it’s about time solidarity in football kicks in between two fanbases. They will happily boycott.

[MarkBRFC]

6 minutes ago, Elrovers said:

Well they understand the position we are in, and it’s about time solidarity in football kicks in between two fanbases. They will happily boycott.

I bet they don't.

Football fans generally only really care about what is happening at there own club, despite the calls from there supporters trust I imagine they will treat it as a normal game and still turn up in fairly decent numbers, and buy plenty from the concourse.

Would love to be wrong, but I just don't see it.

[...]

5 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

I bet they don't.

Football fans generally only really care about what is happening at there own club, despite the calls from there supporters trust I imagine they will treat it as a normal game and still turn up in fairly decent numbers, and buy plenty from the concourse.

Would love to be wrong, but I just don't see it.

 

Blackpool fans at Ewood. You'd be surprised at who is willing to help out especially when they've been through it

 

[MarkBRFC]

5 minutes ago, ... said:

 

Blackpool fans at Ewood. You'd be surprised at who is willing to help out especially when they've been through it

 

Yep I remember it, over 2k of them still bought tickets to go in and spent money on the concourse though.

[...]

4 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

Yep I remember it, over 2k of them still bought tickets to go in and spent money on the concourse though.

That wasn't about not spending on the concourse though. That was about being united and and bringing to light piss poor ownership

[MarkBRFC]

2 minutes ago, ... said:

That wasn't about not spending on the concourse though. That was about being united and and bringing to light piss poor ownership

And we're still here a decade later.

Fair enough for Blackpool they got through it, I bet they couldn't give a damn about us now they are sorted though.

Just the way football fans are.