Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RoverCanada

Swiss Ramble thread on Rovers' finances

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, JHRover said:

Who was the most recent club to be put under a transfer embargo for a breach? Birmingham were put under a 'partial embargo' whatever one of those is and still went ahead and spent £3 million without having to sell anyone. They had a phase of dishing out embargoes 5 years ago when the rules had only just come in but since then there's been very little.

There's a difference between betting the ranch and spending heavily. Depends on what the owners want to do. Spending gazillions is fine as long as the owners are prepared to do it and won't chuck in the towel as soon as it doesn't work well. We're told Venkys are billionaires and are desperate for the club to succeed.

A sale & leaseback of the ground need not be gambling the club's future. What Derby did was clever, helped them avoid FFP trouble whilst assembling a good side and now they're on the cusp of promotion because of it. Very clever. No doubt when the time comes their owner will transfer their ground back for a nominal fee and in the meantime they'll be paying peppercorn rent. It isn't the case that he's sold it off to 3rd party property developers etc.

Burnley had parachute income when they went up so were at an advantage that apparently we can't compete with. Think Norwich were too. Sheffield United signed people like Norwood, McGoldrick and Clarke none of whom fit into our recruitment criteria of value growth.

Mowbray is now balancing the demands of a support base with the lunacy of the owners. Tough job.

Sheff Weds under embargo last season

Derby’s sale & leaseback is being challenged by Middlesbrough. What if they lose on Monday ?

Burnley went up under “he who shall not be named” with no parachute payments

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

Dyche did it. Wilder did it. Farke did it.

Step up to the plate Mr M !!!

 

These guys gained promotion at clubs with committed, enthusiastic, mainly local owners and probably loads of help from board members who wanted nothing other than their club to succeed. Rovers is not the same. You simply can't run a successful football club at this level with owners who don't know the game or the club. 

Mowbray and Waggott are doing their best but there needs to be so much more support behind the scenes at Ewood. 

19 hours ago, JHRover said:

 

What Derby did was clever, helped them avoid FFP trouble whilst assembling a good side and now they're on the cusp of promotion because of it. Very clever. No doubt when the time comes their owner will transfer their ground back for a nominal fee and in the meantime they'll be paying peppercorn rent. It isn't the case that he's sold it off to 3rd party property developers etc.

 

This is exactly the sort of idea Rovers should be employing but who is going to investigate these opportunities. Mowbray is busy with the football side, Waggott is looking at match day revenue and finances. Over to you Venky's.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t trust Venkys with ownership of the ground at all and I think any suggestion of such is insane.

It would go tits up faster than you can say “Tesco’s car park”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, S8 & Blue said:

I wouldn’t trust Venkys with ownership of the ground at all and I think any suggestion of such is insane.

It would go tits up faster than you can say “Tesco’s car park”

Maybe, but I am just suggesting some inventive thinking and actually taking an interest. 

One meeting a year with the manager and paying the bills does not fulfil their obligations. We are just not set up to succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, S8 & Blue said:

I wouldn’t trust Venkys with ownership of the ground at all and I think any suggestion of such is insane.

It would go tits up faster than you can say “Tesco’s car park”

Its not a question of whether we would trust them. If they wanted to do it they could and there's nothing anyone on here could do about it. The point here isn't whether we'd agree with it - I'm sure no Derby fan was consulted prior to their owner doing it and I don't recall much uproar from them as most appear to trust him to get on with it and do the right thing. 

The point is that there's an awful lot of moaning from people at Rovers about FFP rules and how tough it is to deal with those rules yet little evidence of anyone actually doing something about it. The Derby one is an extreme example of how to do it, but quite a clever way to dodge the rules. There are other ways such as fake sponsors and training ground sponsorship etc. Sadly our billionaire owners who claim to own 90 odd companies or whatever it was don't see any benefit to one of those sponsoring the club to allow funds through the back door to avoid FFP trouble. Much easier to do nothing and then moan when other clubs spend far more without sanction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rules are the rules. Sponsorship has to be at market value. This is one of the reasons Wednesday are up the shitpipe.

I hate the idea of gambling on promotion by building on sand, lies and by remortgaging the family jewels.

It might not be exciting: but a slow, self sustainable build (I know, we don’t have that either) with a long term target is far more preferable than leaving a trail of bad decisions that makes promotion an immediate REQUIREMENT

Edited by S8 & Blue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JHRover said:

 Sadly our billionaire owners who claim to own 90 odd companies or whatever it was don't see any benefit to one of those sponsoring the club to allow funds through the back door to avoid FFP trouble. Much easier to do nothing and then moan when other clubs spend far more without sanction.

This is the point. The owners have the potential, the money and the opportunity to do everything within their means to make Rovers a success but they do very little.

Why do they bother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, S8 & Blue said:

The rules are the rules. Sponsorship has to be at market value. This is one of the reasons Wednesday are up the shitpipe.

I hate the idea of gambling on promotion by building on sand, lies and by remortgaging the family jewels.

It might not be exciting: but a slow, self sustainable build (I know, we don’t have that either) with a long term target is far more preferable than leaving a trail of bad decisions that makes promotion an immediate REQUIREMENT

Derby's owner has sold their stadium to himself, legitimately. The League has given it the go-ahead. Other clubs don't like it but there's nothing they can do about it now. It has enabled them to assemble a quality side that on Monday might be in the Premier League. 

Speaking of gambling and putting clubs in danger our owners have heaped £150 million of debt on this club and until the last couple of years were running it as a cowboy operation. Both a far bigger risk to the club's long term future than selling the ground to themselvses. If I was putting my trust in someone I think it would be the Derby owner who has invested to make his club better and had them in promotion contention every year.

You refer to a 'self sustainable' build but that isn't going to be possible. If we want to be self sufficient then we are going to need to sell more than £10 million of players every year, yet if we do that we'll probably end up back in League One.

Edited by JHRover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this topic with interest...but can’t help thinking that there are many Rovers fans who supported Rovers Trust’s action to ensure Ewood was designated an Asset of Community Value to prevent a sale of the ground...

Equally had Venkys “done a Derby” I suspect many would have been suspicious of their motives.

My take is that Derby is owned by a fan, Rovers aren’t so we view all those transactions through that lens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Selling one or two players for 15 million every two or three seasons then reinvesting a lump and using the rest to pay down previous debt and to help future running costs is probably the right way to do it.  IF we don't or can't get enough investment to hold onto what we have and build a very good side over a few windows.

Growing a team to break up and sell over 2 or 3 windows or so then reinvesting very little and trying to do it all again whilst still dreaming of promotion isn't.

Option 1  is acceptable it's running a semi sustainable club again whilst retaining a strong squad that you keep searching for the final pieces of the jigsaw for that one over achieving season or you get stronger and stronger and are regulars at the top end that should finally pay off eventually.

Option 2 stinks - stinks of agents and people just playing football manager - we've been there, we ended up in league 1.

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Derby county situation is odd. One minute they were up for sale for a quid the next their owner is buying pride park for well over its market value. Could even more bizarre if he sold it back for peanuts. It’s not a long term plan as you can only do this once. On Derby county and possible promotion they have been contenders for years there turn over won’t actually be massively different to Rovers. Due to attendances maybe 2/3m more I’m talking before player sales as they have sold a few over the years. But let’s say that extra 10m over 3 seasons on top of the allowed losses of £39m - could be why they have had no sanctions so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frank Lampard County I think are going for a little bit of the #hit or bust scenario whilst they have a big name at the helm and are getting more publicity than they have for years.

They've found a way to get cash in short term but will they keep trying to do it time and again ? Doubtful, as we've seen these wealthy owners try things, try other things then either get fed up or run out of funding themselves and it goes tits up.  It really needs to work for them in the next season or two or they are back to square one yet still paying players that haven't been good enough to get them over the final hurdle.

If it works though and they go up all's well and good but like others i'd not be very comfortable with our lot going down this route, well not yet anyway as once that money is spewed it's spewed.  I don't feel the team is strong enough it needs more building before a final big push imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.