Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
philipl

Rovers and Covid

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Thought J*B said the ‘professionals’ in executive positions have little to no power and it’s certain shadowy conduits that are still actually running things?

Edited by Mattyblue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He did also say earlier than Ben Whiteman's brother who "works at BAE" told him that he is about to sign for us :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

‘BAE Burnley’ at that... no way to talk about Samlesbury!

Edited by Mattyblue

Share this post


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

The Messageboard was up in arms when the club announced two years ago that it was going to build steadily in the Championship and would not expect to be challenging for promotion until 20/21.

For good or for ill very few football clubs think in those sorts of multi season plans.

Equally, they might not be any good but Mowbray and Waggott are seasoned football professionals. They were recruited as such, given their parameters and told to do the job without interference.

Again, for good or for ill the Rovers ownership has honoured its commitment and left the professional management it recruited to do the jobs they were recruited for.

Very few clubs don't have interfering owners who also write the cheques when they are needed.

Mowbray said last season that playoffs was the aim which is at odds with the slow build nonsense. I accept that Mowbray is a real professional in the truest sense and he has done some good things here but I cannot accept that Waggott has been professional in his workings here irrespective of his time in football. He has played a big part reducing season ticket sales by trying to impose disproportionate price increases, shutting stands and largely doing away with concessions. His brief was to grow income. He has been an abject, expensive failure.

Venkys commitment didn't start two years ago, the bought the club nearly a decade ago. And their commitment that fateful day their ownership was announced has been pissed all over. 

To remind you of their undertaking ten years ago.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/nov/19/venkys-completes-takeover-blackburn-rovers

We had a debt of £20m when they took over, what is it now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Mowbray said last season that playoffs was the aim which is at odds with the slow build nonsense. I accept that Mowbray is a real professional in the truest sense and he has done some good things here but I cannot accept that Waggott has been professional in his workings here irrespective of his time in football. He has played a big part reducing season ticket sales by trying to impose disproportionate price increases, shutting stands and largely doing away with concessions. His brief was to grow income. He has been an abject, expensive failure.

Venkys commitment didn't start two years ago, the bought the club nearly a decade ago. And their commitment that fateful day their ownership was announced has been pissed all over. 

To remind you of their undertaking ten years ago.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/nov/19/venkys-completes-takeover-blackburn-rovers

We had a debt of £20m when they took over, what is it now?

The non-Venky debt is smaller than it was then paradoxically.

I will remind you, their tenure 2010-2018 was horrific and the worst time I have experienced supporting Rovers.

However, if you do a simple mind exercise of saying we have owners X instead of Venky's from the day of the appointment of Mowbray, then owners X could have hardly done any better than they have done.

Now if Mowbray and Waggott have squandered some of the huge advantages this have given them, the argument is with the management and not with the ownership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'd assume non owner debt i'e bank overdraft is smaller because the borrowing limit is now smaller, borrowing against income of 10 million instead of 20/30.

 If they could've run up a 30 million limit i'm pretty sure they would have at some point.

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


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

I'd assume non owner debt i'e bank overdraft is smaller because the borrowing limit is now smaller, borrowing against income of 10 million instead of 20/30.

 If they could've run up a 30 million limit i'm pretty sure they would have at some point.

I believe Rovers have the same arrangement as when they were re-banked away from Barclays- a £15m overdraft from the State Bank of India secured by Venky's.

Share this post


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

The non-Venky debt is smaller than it was then paradoxically.

I will remind you, their tenure 2010-2018 was horrific and the worst time I have experienced supporting Rovers.

However, if you do a simple mind exercise of saying we have owners X instead of Venky's from the day of the appointment of Mowbray, then owners X could have hardly done any better than they have done.

Now if Mowbray and Waggott have squandered some of the huge advantages this have given them, the argument is with the management and not with the ownership. 

It's interesting that you arbitrarily draw the division line at 2018. It's an unusual place to put it as it's well after the chaos of 5 managers and the Kean era. It seemed then there was a change in tack with how things are done, albeit with the next 3 incumbents we were still badly run and gave us no success. So I'm a little bit at a loss as what operationally has changed since TM came in, as oppose to under Lambert or Bowyer that warrents such a divide. 

Even if we do accept such a division you still have to ignore the previous 8 years. The fact is they are the same and are responsible for those 8 years. You can't just imagine it away or wash away their responsibility for it. Not the consequences of us as a club experiencing the effects of those 8 years. Our league position , our finances etc are all a result of their tenure. Such a division doesn't really exist practically. 

Getting over those two obstacles I still take issue with the couldn't be better since TM. Still plenty of issues. TM getting the gig in part because of the agency he is with - having such a limited pool of candidates isnt healthy. having his mate as his boss. Form not counting for anything (12 without a win for starters.) Delays in telling him what the budget is. Ewood falling into disrepair. No re-engagement with the lost fans. Whilst positively philanthropic compared to their early efforts it can't really be seen as good in an objective sense. Still far too many problems from our owners, who are seen in a positive light only because of how fire they were previously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, philipl said:

The non-Venky debt is smaller than it was then paradoxically.

I will remind you, their tenure 2010-2018 was horrific and the worst time I have experienced supporting Rovers.

However, if you do a simple mind exercise of saying we have owners X instead of Venky's from the day of the appointment of Mowbray, then owners X could have hardly done any better than they have done.

Now if Mowbray and Waggott have squandered some of the huge advantages this have given them, the argument is with the management and not with the ownership. 

Owners X may have turned up to watch a game, may have got a hoe to the weeds or paint brush in hand, may have apologised for being either inept or as thick as pig shit in their past decision making.

Give them a break or credit, I really don't think so.

The highlighted bit is pure conjecture to substantiate your perceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Blue blood said:

It's interesting that you arbitrarily draw the division line at 2018. It's an unusual place to put it as it's well after the chaos of 5 managers and the Kean era. It seemed then there was a change in tack with how things are done, albeit with the next 3 incumbents we were still badly run and gave us no success. So I'm a little bit at a loss as what operationally has changed since TM came in, as oppose to under Lambert or Bowyer that warrents such a divide. 

Even if we do accept such a division you still have to ignore the previous 8 years. The fact is they are the same and are responsible for those 8 years. You can't just imagine it away or wash away their responsibility for it. Not the consequences of us as a club experiencing the effects of those 8 years. Our league position , our finances etc are all a result of their tenure. Such a division doesn't really exist practically. 

Getting over those two obstacles I still take issue with the couldn't be better since TM. Still plenty of issues. TM getting the gig in part because of the agency he is with - having such a limited pool of candidates isnt healthy. having his mate as his boss. Form not counting for anything (12 without a win for starters.) Delays in telling him what the budget is. Ewood falling into disrepair. No re-engagement with the lost fans. Whilst positively philanthropic compared to their early efforts it can't really be seen as good in an objective sense. Still far too many problems from our owners, who are seen in a positive light only because of how fire they were previously. 

It’s as simple as this analogy for me.

we married them via an arranged marriage.

they kicked the shit out of us every night , abused, used and raped us until this imaginary line that has just cropped up in 2018.

since then they have stopped the physical abuse and Instead ignore and neglect us but buy us some flowers on Valentine’s Day via moonpig (Valentines day being the transfer window )

Edited by Oldgregg86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The line in the sand if there actually is one was drawn after relegation as it seemed someone somewhere finally sat up and took some notice. The audits followed and since then it's been only buy young British potential for real money, loan or freebies for the rest whilst the youth is filtered in.

A bit of speculate to accumulate big money buys then grow the book value again as high as possible. That'll help convince the bank etc to keep the thing going but without promotion at some point soon there'll need to be another big clawback you'd have thought.  That's before covid of FFP have been brought into the equation.

There does seem to be some sort of plan in place but exactly what it is and where it will end up is very much open to debate.

Share this post


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

Not Rovers but viewing figures for all sports have collapsed in the USA this year.

Boy is English football hung out to dry if numbers like this repeat for worldwide audiences of our game.

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/10/the-decline-in-pandemic-sports-viewership.html

Live on TV 6 or even 7 days a week is too much.

TV greed created the monster and may yet kill it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair play on doubling and trebling down Philip but it’s time to put the shovel away.

We remain a basket case of a club and during this wonderful last two years we have seen the professionals they have left to ‘get on with it’ destroy our fanbase.

Model owners would be holding their team to account, not turning a blind eye and paying (adding to the debt) the balance of annual failure.

They need to fund promotion (being creating with FFP), or sell to someone who can before the bank intervene again. Instead they are still heeding advice from the wrong people.

Share this post


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

Fair play on doubling and trebling down Philip but it’s time to put the shovel away.

We remain a basket case of a club and during this wonderful last two years we have seen the professionals they have left to ‘get on with it’ destroy our fanbase.

Model owners would be holding their team to account, not turning a blind eye and paying (adding to the debt) the balance of annual failure.

They need to fund promotion (being creating with FFP), or sell to someone who can before the bank intervene again. Instead they are still heeding advice from the wrong people.

And your list of buyers is....

Share this post


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

And your list of buyers is....

If they hadn’t destroyed the club and it’s finances we would have a list of buyers longer than Epstein’s clientele list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, philipl said:

And your list of buyers is....

There are always buyers for a distressed asset, especially with the potential of PL or even a revamped Championship which I would prefer over Man City Bs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Oldgregg86 said:

If they hadn’t destroyed the club and it’s finances we would have a list of buyers longer than Epstein’s clientele list

Having actively worked on finding new buyers I can tell you there are more hen's teeth than serious candidates.

To my knowledge, there has only been one buyer who

1) had the cash to pay-off the Venky's

2) had the cash to invest seriously in Rovers

3) did their homework

4) submitted a serious offer in writing.

That was Qatar in 2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AllRoverAsia said:

There are always buyers for a distressed asset, especially with the potential of PL or even a revamped Championship which I would prefer over Man City Bs

That is what the fans of Wigan, Bolton, Blackpool, Bury, Macclesfield, Stockport and Chester all thought too....

Share this post


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

That is what the fans of Wigan, Bolton, Blackpool, Bury, Macclesfield, Stockport and Chester all thought too....

All pretty much let down by the EFL and their weak as piss fit and proper test. I don't think any of them would have encountered the issues they had but for the inadequacies of the people who should have been looking after them. 

That is where the problem lies in my view.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, philipl said:

Having actively worked on finding new buyers I can tell you there are more hen's teeth than serious candidates.

To my knowledge, there has only been one buyer who

1) had the cash to pay-off the Venky's

2) had the cash to invest seriously in Rovers

3) did their homework

4) submitted a serious offer in writing.

That was Qatar in 2011

Yet iv'e always thought it a bit strange that you are the only one who's ever pushed this. I also know that some on here had assumptions about an outfit from that region coming over to the UK to sign off a big corporate deal that turned out to be 2+2= 67.

Some more meat needed on those bones i'm afraid.

There did however seem to be a few consortiums publicly trying to get involved a few years ago although it looked more like they were preparing rescue packages than actually buying out.

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Yet iv'e always thought it a bit strange that you are the only one who's ever pushed this. I also know that some on here had assumptions about an outfit from that region coming over to the UK to sign off a big corporate deal that turned out to be 2+2= 67.

Some more meat needed on those bones i'm afraid.

There did however seem to be a few consortiums publicly trying to get involved a few years ago although it looked more like they were preparing rescue packages than actually buying out.

tomphil wonder no more. There are oodles of evidence that 2+2= 4

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/venkys-denies-intent-to-sell-blackburn-rovers-g6kwfkbj9rfhttps://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/9362126.blackburn-rovers-owners-tell-qatar-oil-giant-dont-want-sell/

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/nov/14/venkys-interest-selling-blackburn-rovers

https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/15/2758862/blackburn-rovers-owners-dismiss-reports-linking-club-with-qatari-

https://punemirror.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/blackburn-rovers-fc-up-for-sale/articleshow/31975419.cms

https://www.rugbytradedirectory.com/shock-takeover-bid-for-blackburn-rovers

Al-Khelaifi was previously linked with a move for Blackburn Rovers- https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/10322277/nasser-al-khelaifi-leeds-united-psg/

Edited by philipl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this on the 6th of June last year:

The Leeds link has been around for a few days- their owner has said no but this has just been posted:

https://www.teamtalk.com/news/french-journalist-provides-huge-update-on-leeds-investment-talks

If you want to link Qatar and Rovers:

https://www.arabianbusiness.com/blackburn-rovers-deny-deal-talks-with-qatari-royals-430269.html

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/15722809

All those stories are completely for real. I have explained this on another recent thread somewhere on the MB.

There is a particular reason why this particular Qatari being in the market would stimulate some lazy journalists to think Blackburn Rovers.

This thread should be entitled "Potential Buyer for Rovers"

Rovers are emphatically not being sold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow....what a thread. And one man sparring with everybody!

Warning -Philip L. has the knowledge and track-record of many years standing of Rovers finances.

And is as keen on the Rovers as anyone BUT he is forensic.

I am not entering the debate.... apart from my long-standing view that Ewood Park is rarely the 12th Man when we are up against it.

Sitting in the Jack Walker occasionally is like nearing death. Long live the BBE and Riverside.

And the barracking of Wilcox and other(usually) home players has always been upsetting . Going way back Peter Dobing,Chris Crowe and (probably)John Byrom left because of crowd hostility.

But I booed Shearer when he came back....so leave me out of this. COYB.

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.