Herbie6590

Yes

It’s debt to the extent that it demonstrates how much we are overspending compared to income, but it’s not debt like your mortgage or credit card bill. It’s more akin to borrowing off your parents. It’s debt, but all parties accept the reality...they’ll not ask for repayment & you’ll never be able to afford to repay ?

The only way Venky’s debt is repaid is if one of the following happens :- 1. Club income increases to such an extent that expenses are fully covered by income leaving a surplus which can be used to reduce that debt...so realistically PL TV money is probably the only way t/o increases to that extent 2. Venky’s find a buyer who values the club at a price which would cover their debt - so north of £250m. The only way Blackburn Rovers will be worth that sort of money is if diamond mines are discovered in the Riverside and oil deposits are unearthed in the car park behind the Blackburn End if Venky’s want out, those loans are gone, they ain’t getting it back save for putting the club into liquidation & selling the land at Ewood & Brockhall but even then, this would barely dent the sums owed, they still stand to lose a fortune. If there is something to worry about, it is them stopping to fund the weekly shortfall of £300k, because then we would have a distress sale of our players and we’d be operating like Accrington Stanley. Now there is a an argument that at least this would be sustainable and “honest” & to be frank, I have a sympathy with that view. But forget ever returning to the PL.

OK, I think I get you; the best example must be Burnley then. They didn’t overspend after their 1st promotion, used the parachutes wisely, maintained sensible budgets and won promotion again, didn’t overspend, were relegated once more and repeated the trick again. if things go to plan, they might get another chance soon....

I’m not sure how you are defining success if you are offering up Blackpool (a basket case club if ever there was, thanks to owners, who ended up in the 4th tier) as an exception; but just considering the last 10 years or so, these clubs have been relegated and bounced back, some more than once, so they must have managed the transition to some extent :- Newcastle Utd Middlesbrough WBA Hull City West Ham Wolves Fulham Cardiff and er....Burnley

1. Distress sale of the highest wage earners 2. Relegation clauses inserted into contracts to reduce wages/bonuses 3. Redundancies of non-playing staff 4. Sale of fixed assets (ground, training ground) 5. Securitisation of future season ticket revenue ...all of these have been tried at various times by various clubs...

Don’t forget FFP rules inhibit what owners can put in. It’s a t/o related formula in the Championship so with low crowds & low sponsorship we are always going to be struggling.

They absolutely aren’t, but how many potential suitors with the required financial clout are out there to take this on ?

We got relegated & lost TV money. So if Venky’s go, we have to find a new owner willing to cover weekly cash flow deficits or eliminate those deficits. Only two ways to eliminate- increase t/o (profit) or reduce costs to make good £300k per week. Venkys out means an alternative is required.

Accrington Stanley make a profit

Aren’t these tailored ads which reflect your search history ? ?

I agree totally, it’s of their own making, they are effectively paying a tax on their own naivety but my comment was relating to what we would need from a new owner. A new owner would either have to decide whether to reduce costs to breakeven, fund the difference or somehow persuade fans to contribute £300k per week. Realistically, the only viable source for £300k per week is Premier League TV money....

They are not taking money out...they are moving it around their group companies. It’s the corporate equivalent of moving money between a cheque account and a savings account. It’s a transfer.

The only external debt is the overdraft which costs us £400k p.a. - Venky’s don’t charge interest on their debt. The losses that they fund are the running costs of the club (in other words wages). Any new owner would still have to decide between funding that £17m gap themselves, reducing costs by that amount or increasing turnover (& profit) sufficient to bring in roughly £17m pa.

What about the bit where the new owners put in £17m per annum ?

It’s not inconceivable; it’s often used when a parent company buys a service on behalf of the group & cross charges the subsidiary. It’s not material in the great scheme of things.

Why ? Group companies move around cash all the time & charge inter company fees for services provided. It’s really not at all unusual. Ultimately Venky’s own both companies, they’re just moving money around their own business ?‍♂️

Looks like some kind of “management fee” or similar...nothing sinister IMHO

Forget it....found ‘em ?

Jim - where are those Op Ex numbers from....struggling to find them if you can help....??

I’m not recognising the numbers that are quoted....if someone can point me to the section in the accounts I’ll have a go...

The overdraft is just £11m & that will largely be to ensure payments go through the bank a/c smoothly. The rest of the debt is intra-Group so there’s nothing to pay off. They borrow it from themselves. The club runs at a loss. Unless someone covers those losses we go bust. Venky’s are subsidising Blackburn Rovers to the tune of £336k net per week. A new owner would have to cut costs by that amount, stump up the same subsidy or increase turnover by that amount to keep us in business.

I agree, I didn’t understand their motives on Day 1 & nothing that has happened subsequently has shed any light on this. One thing is certain, it’s been an expensive hobby...

To all intents & purposes, they are the same thing, VLL is essentially just a holding company.

Correct. The shareholding is what is sold...at an agreed price...which is based on the value perceived by the buyer.