Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
den

Venkys - Welcome or Not?

Venkys - Welcome or unwelcome?  

185 members have voted

  1. 1. If Venkys apologised and stated that they would attend the next home game, how would you feel?

    • Hostile towards them
    • Willing to forgive and draw a line
    • Wouldnt care at all


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, thorpefleet said:

Wondering how Tony and Venky talks have panned out?? any news??

 

Stuart posted a link on the transfer thread a few hours ago. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/05/2018 at 06:04, Herbie6590 said:

@PLJPB it’s a great point which I missed, so I would argue that V’s “investment” is therefore of the order of c.£130m.

 

It's been a very interesting thread - well done to Herbie and PLJPB for enlightening us all.

If we had owners that we could trust and communicate with, there would be no need for us to worry.

If the Venky's investment is £130 rather than £250 then that is less than £20m per year. A drop in the ocean in corporate Venkyland and probably less than the club's income from other sources. 

Given that the losses and outgoings are not itemised for us to see, I would not be surprised if the £130m is not offset by some of the incoming transfer profits and TV money. Maybe they have actually spent very little at all!

Venky's admit they bought Rovers as an advertising vehicle for their company. They have no interest in football or Blackburn or the fans. Why would they keep throwing money at a failed venture?

Maybe we can't use the term 'stripping' but the assets Rovers had in 2010 have all but gone and the money has not been reinvested.   What does the future hold now that we can't top up the coffers with money from player sales?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Crimpshrine said:

It's been a very interesting thread - well done to Herbie and PLJPB for enlightening us all.

If we had owners that we could trust and communicate with, there would be no need for us to worry.

If the Venky's investment is £130 rather than £250 then that is less than £20m per year. A drop in the ocean in corporate Venkyland and probably less than the club's income from other sources. 

Given that the losses and outgoings are not itemised for us to see, I would not be surprised if the £130m is not offset by some of the incoming transfer profits and TV money. Maybe they have actually spent very little at all!

Venky's admit they bought Rovers as an advertising vehicle for their company. They have no interest in football or Blackburn or the fans. Why would they keep throwing money at a failed venture?

Maybe we can't use the term 'stripping' but the assets Rovers had in 2010 have all but gone and the money has not been reinvested.   What does the future hold now that we can't top up the coffers with money from player sales?   

It is certainly , with very interesting and now that the cat is out of the bag, with regards to now much they have really put in perhaps more fans than ever can now see the bigger picture. Are they naïve investors, who have been taken for a ride, or are they clever manipulative people, who sized an opportunity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

End of the day they are successful business people surrounded by their own finance experts and corporate law men etc. When these types get ripped off they usually move on pretty quickly and don't get ripped off again.

The whole Rovers setup thing and Vll and agent partners etc is probably now all part of one giant accounting operation which serves a purpose to those involved, like the parent company, to a large extent . Yes there's been massive teething problems and collateral damage but there will also have been plenty of purposes served and benefits to be had you can be sure.

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/05/2018 at 13:37, Crimpshrine said:

Venky's admit they bought Rovers as an advertising vehicle for their company. They have no interest in football or Blackburn or the fans.

And in that sentence lays the crux of all our problems,the sum of all our fears.

How can we ever hope to move forward with these owners when their Hearts are clearly not in the right place?

We are caught between a Rock and a hard place with these people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still no full details through rovers on the Tony  and venky talks . just link through stuart  . Very strange!!

Guess its a case of wait and see

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I  still thinking most wont forgive venkies even if they took us back to premier status lol..

people want us to compete at thesame level as when Jack and Daglish took us and could give Burnley a game.

That all has been reversed but the rot started before venky family took over.

I understand all  fans feelings and believe Tony is doing a great job. I have been an armchair supporter from early 70,s and not been to many matches.

The first match I really saw was when rovers playeda short time on oozebooth fields but I was only young and cant remember a lot about it. 

Watching Our team has been a rollercoaster ride through  divisions. I think John o mara was the big signing when Rovers were a major intrest to me.

lets hope we can and will get back to a club that can compete in mid table premier butwho knows what the future brings.

Thanks for everyone who keeps me uppdated on the site. it is appreciated.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/05/2018 at 22:37, Crimpshrine said:

It's been a very interesting thread - well done to Herbie and PLJPB for enlightening us all.

If we had owners that we could trust and communicate with, there would be no need for us to worry.

If the Venky's investment is £130 rather than £250 then that is less than £20m per year. A drop in the ocean in corporate Venkyland and probably less than the club's income from other sources. 

Given that the losses and outgoings are not itemised for us to see, I would not be surprised if the £130m is not offset by some of the incoming transfer profits and TV money. Maybe they have actually spent very little at all!

Venky's admit they bought Rovers as an advertising vehicle for their company. They have no interest in football or Blackburn or the fans. Why would they keep throwing money at a failed venture?

Maybe we can't use the term 'stripping' but the assets Rovers had in 2010 have all but gone and the money has not been reinvested.   What does the future hold now that we can't top up the coffers with money from player sales?   

Just to put this into a different context, Abramovitch is owed 1.5 billion quid by Chelsea! That's what he lent them interest free, repayable at short notice.

I don't suppose he will seek it back but who would want that hanging over their club? Football has been ruined. most clubs are at the mercy of some individual these days.

Compare the German League. I know which i prefer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 47er said:

Just to put this into a different context, Abramovitch is owed 1.5 billion quid by Chelsea! That's what he lent them interest free, repayable at short notice.

I don't suppose he will seek it back but who would want that hanging over their club? Football has been ruined. most clubs are at the mercy of some individual these days.

Compare the German League. I know which i prefer.

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/chelsea-owner-roman-abramovich-may-need-to-explain-source-of-wealth-to-get-new-uk-visa-a3845121.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London has long been the dirty money washing capital of Europe so it's no wonder some of us ask serious questions as to why foreign owners are pitching up everywhere and so called pumping money 'in' to English clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely right tomphil. Abramovich bought the Chelsea to protect himself from Putin in case they fell out and to clean up his money from his shady business interests. He must be worried that his high profile and living abroad may not be enough after the Litvenyenko and Scripal poisonings and probably should chuck a bung to the Kremlin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/05/2018 at 07:04, Herbie6590 said:

@PLJPB it’s a great point which I missed, so my bad...flicking from VLL to BRFC, newco to oldco, March y/e to June y/e is the only excuse I can offer for overlooking it...well that & stupidity 🤨.

Having done a quick “compare & contrast” to VLL, we can definitively say they invested £128.5m in VLL to March 2017 - the BRFC a/cs to June 2017 indicate increased parent borrowing, decreased bank borrowing subsequently, so I would argue that V’s “investment” is therefore of the order of c.£130m.

 

[You are welcome to come on a podcast when next year’s a/cs are out to keep me & PhilipL on our toes. 😉]  👍🏻

VLL has £149m paid and allotted.

That is undoubtedly cash ploughed in.

In addition, there is the lending by the State Bank of India which is totally secured by Rao-owned assets which I would forecast the likelihood of being repaid without recourse to the Raos as being all but zero. Even though the bank provide the cash, in effect the Raos are denied the use of that money or assets for any other purpose.

So I am sticking with my quarter billion figure.

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Norbert Rassragr said:

Absolutely right tomphil. Abramovich bought the Chelsea to protect himself from Putin in case they fell out and to clean up his money from his shady business interests. He must be worried that his high profile and living abroad may not be enough after the Litvenyenko and Scripal poisonings and probably should chuck a bung to the Kremlin.

Add to that him and several other high profile Ruski billionaires pitching up off the coast of Scotland on their 'vacation' one year not long ago and mooching around Scottish villages and outposts, what's all that about ?

He's a Putin spy if ever there was one 😲

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, philipl said:

VLL has £149m paid and allotted.

That is undoubtedly cash ploughed in.

In addition, there is the lending by the State Bank of India which is totally secured by Rao-owned assets which I would forecast the likelihood of being repaid without recourse to the Raos as being all but zero. Even though the bank provide the cash, in effect the Raos are denied the use of that money or assets for any other purpose.

So I am sticking with my quarter billion figure.

   

How does £149 million become £250 million just by adding the debt they've had with the Bank of India?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely a lot of the BOI debt has been repayed as an ongoing thing otherwise they wouldn't keep lending, regardless of what it's secured on any Bank loan is a two way street.

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/05/2018 at 15:57, philipl said:

VLL has £149m paid and allotted.

That is undoubtedly cash ploughed in.

In addition, there is the lending by the State Bank of India which is totally secured by Rao-owned assets which I would forecast the likelihood of being repaid without recourse to the Raos as being all but zero. Even though the bank provide the cash, in effect the Raos are denied the use of that money or assets for any other purpose.

So I am sticking with my quarter billion figure.

   

We were talking as at June 2017 being the date of the latest BRFC filed accounts. But I would agree that the current share capital is £147m. However the aforementioned BRFC accounts show bank debt of £12m so unless you are aware of additional bank borrowings of around £90m being taken out in the last 9 months then I cannot go with your£250m figure. 

My guess would be that the bank borrowings will still be around £12m (the additional share capital having been pumped in to keep it at that level) and so current total investment will be around £147 + £12 = £159m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, PLJPB said:

We were talking as at June 2017 being the date of the latest BRFC filed accounts. But I would agree that the current share capital is £147m. However the aforementioned BRFC accounts show bank debt of £12m so unless you are aware of additional bank borrowings of around £90m being taken out in the last 9 months then I cannot go with your£250m figure. 

My guess would be that the bank borrowings will still be around £12m (the additional share capital having been pumped in to keep it at that level) and so current total investment will be around £147 + £12 = £159m.

eye, £14.9million per season average. If they weren't so thick (or corrupt) and we were still in the EPL that could have gone on transfers, plus more each season, just from income, they would have had to put next to newt in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AAK said:

eye, £14.9million per season average. If they weren't so thick (or corrupt) and we were still in the EPL that could have gone on transfers, plus more each season, just from income, they would have had to put next to newt in.

It would have taken between 5-10 mill per season to keep us as we were in the Prem anyway to underpin wages and stuff and that's something they'll plainly have seen on the books when they took over and something they must have been prepared for, in words at least although god knows what plans were hatched behind the scenes.

Add in I think it was Nick Harris who claimed documents had been seen for a family bank acc containing a cash pile of over 400 million as part of the proof of funds required by the takeover process. No one is telling me they have poured 250 mill of that into a black hole just to support their baby, i'm sorry but #### off just no way as I've said before those kind of losses would've brought them to their knees. Not happening it's all paper accounting, number crunching.

I'd say they are probably about 40+ million out of pocket more than they might have been prepared for or more the Parent company was comfortable running into the club as part of the process they acquired it for. Eye watering enough in itself of course but no way the horror story that gets put about although the real horror will lie in where most of that has gone 😮

Unless of course there was something completely different at play from day one but we'll never know.

Hopefully things keep going now as they started last summer then in a few years we might see some sense in things at last.

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


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

It would have taken between 5-10 mill per season to keep us as we were in the Prem anyway to underpin wages and stuff and that's something they'll plainly have seen on the books when they took over and something they must have been prepared for, in words at least although god knows what plans were hatched behind the scenes.

Add in I think it was Nick Harris who claimed documents had been seen for a family bank acc containing a cash pile of over 400 million as part of the proof of funds required by the takeover process. No one is telling me they have poured 250 mill of that into a black hole just to support their baby, i'm sorry but #### off just no way as I've said before those kind of losses would've brought them to their knees. Not happening it's all paper accounting, number crunching.

I'd say they are probably about 40+ million out of pocket more than they might have been prepared for or more the Parent company was comfortable running into the club as part of the process they acquired it for. Eye watering enough in itself of course but no way the horror story that gets put about although the real horror will lie in where most of that has gone 😮

Unless of course there was something completely different at play from day one but we'll never know.

Well said, but with the funds now in the prem i dont think theyd have had to spend a penny of their own mate, even burnley are spending £15mil on one player these days. 

Share this post


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

Well said, but with the funds now in the prem i dont think theyd have had to spend a penny of their own mate, even burnley are spending £15mil on one player these days. 

Yes true and I think they were probably sold a scenario by their partners where they could recoup their initial stake money quickly then it would more or less run itself.

Irony is run the way it was by the people running it that was achievable in the medium term but it's the way they stood by and let in go to pot for years which really intrigues me. They knew nowt about football but they could clearly see millions disappearing but did nothing just nothing. Why oh why ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Yes true and I think they were probably sold a scenario by their partners where they could recoup their initial stake money quickly then it would more or less run itself.

Irony is run the way it was by the people running it that was achievable in the medium term but it's the way they stood by and let in go to pot for years which really intrigues me. They knew nowt about football but they could clearly see millions disappearing but did nothing just nothing. Why oh why ?

Cause they’re loaded. It’s the only plausible explanation. The losses (financial and football) simply don’t hurt them. If they did they’d have bailed out a long time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/05/2018 at 15:57, philipl said:

VLL has £149m paid and allotted.

That is undoubtedly cash ploughed in.

In addition, there is the lending by the State Bank of India which is totally secured by Rao-owned assets which I would forecast the likelihood of being repaid without recourse to the Raos as being all but zero. Even though the bank provide the cash, in effect the Raos are denied the use of that money or assets for any other purpose.

So I am sticking with my quarter billion figure.

   

I don't think that was how you explained it on the podcast unless I am missing something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bob fleming said:

Cause they’re loaded. It’s the only plausible explanation. The losses (financial and football) simply don’t hurt them. If they did they’d have bailed out a long time ago.

It may not hurt them as such but how does it benefit them in any way at all? Even mega rich people don't like wasting large amounts of money on things they have no interest in. 

There must come a point when they say enough is enough

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.