I am starting to get a bit worried about next season. If we continue with the possession based approach and recruit players to fit this system and it fails to work (since the resumption of the season it seems most managers had figured out how to nulify it and beat us) I am starting to think we will be in a relegation dog fight without and fight.

We may beat the top 6 teams but fail to beat the bottom 12 teams who are happy for us to have all the possession and just hit us with a set piece goal and use their better defensive organization and capabilities to defend the lead.

If you think about it the decision to loan Muric cost Forest their play off place, without his errors in the first few games of the season they would have made the playoffs comfortably.

11 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Vladdy Gresko looked an half decent left back on initial inspection, it was only later on we realised he was bobbins.

Wasn't it more his injury that was the issue. I thought up until that he played very well for us.

Just now, 47er said:

As per usual. Why will it change?

I am not sure we have the cash yet to do any signings at the moment even if we want to.

We have £0 season ticket income which we would normally have had £3-4m by now, First batch of TV cash arrives 2 weeks before the season starts so that will be September and not August. We have pretty much the £4m Venky's injected in June to get us through to the TV cash arriving in September. Of that £4m, at least £2.5m will have been spent on wages for June and July.

At the moment we must be living on empty waiting for the next Venky cash injection, so there is absolutely no way we can do any player purchases until that happens, we simply have no available funds in the club to pay for any signing on bonuses etc.

2 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

& the billionaire US owners who asked the millionaire players to take a pay cut to protect jobs ? ?

Billionaires don't normally have hundreds of millions sat in the bank waiting to be used, the billions are normally the value of their investments etc.

To be honest, the owner has had to fund alot of his US interests as well so may not have huge amounts of spare capital sitting around.

I think all clubs from top to bottom need to have a big shakeup and get back on an even keel financially. All premier league clubs seem to be about to go spending as though nothing has happened? Apart from the top 4 with Champions League cash, the rest are just a poor TV deal away from administration.

When are people going to realise that football finances are never going to be the same again. You have the premier league advicing clubs to expect a 40% drop in the next TV sales.

Maybe just maybe larger clubs are going to be happy with this as it allows them to pay off some of their debts and invest in other things than player wages.

Take the example of Ipswich, Marcus Evans business empire presently has 0 income, do you honestly think he is going to be able to put anything into Ipswich this season or do you think he may start asking for some of the £100m+ he has put into Ipswich back. Also League 1 and 2 clubs may also be able to sell themselves more easily to other local investors with a lower wage cap requirement. 

Portsmouth presently have a wage budget of £3.3m in total so they are already virtually complying. Wycombe and Oxford had a £1.8m budget last season and both made the playoffs.

The £2.5m budget is only for players over the age of 22, and they can only have 22 of these a season, so encourages clubs if they want to spend more to invest in youth team players.

3 hours ago, Richard Oakley said:

Since you asked so nicely:

The activity filing for Blackburn Rovers Football and Athletic for Barclays instigating liquidation proceedings

The activity filing for VLL shortly thereafter showing an influx of £33m.

The figure for the money owed to Barclays was widely quoted at the time. Your figures now clarify why Venkys paid off only 4.1m to the bank, because that was what they thought was owed. It would appear that the accounts do not provide the full story.

I think Venky's paid both overdraft and loan to barclays on takeover, Anderson then went around giving new contracts, bonuses to renew contracts, gag orders to most senior players running the overdraft backup to £16m in 6 months. This increased spending scared Barclays and they called in the overdraft.

He was afteral, sleeping at Brockhall working night and day for us to succeed.

Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Curious. It was reported widely as £8m at the time and Sharpe is still going with that. But if they are the accounts and that isn't a printing error then fair enough. 

I can't work that one out, as no one left when we were relegated to League 1 and we added a number of players such as Whittingham and Dack.

Looks like most players had 40% wage cuts in their contracts. 

By the looks of it we really need to get turnover back to £22m a season and develop and sell a £10m player asset per season.

12 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

That was the pre-tax loss not the wage bill

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11676/11671654/blackburn-report-16-8m-loss-for-league-one-promotion-season

Rovers wage bill was £8m

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/18636225.salary-caps-introduced-championship-discussions-ongoing/

£16.8m for both according to the accounts

1 minute ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Not in League 1. It was about £8-10m 

According to the accounts for the 2017/2018 season our wages paid was £16.8m as first team is around 90% of that it was pretty much £15m.

2 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

The Raos aren't directors of Blackburn Rovers. I expect that the collateral offered the SBOI was the clubs issued share capital as owned by VLL. It probably looked like a very sweet deal at the start.

I doubt the collateral has anything to do with Rovers, the SBOI is the Venky's bank for all of their companies and personal wealth management. If any collateral was attached to Rovers or the holding company it would be registered at companies house.

SBOI have provided the mortgages on the prime real estate outside of Pune which has been used to fund Rovers. That is the collateral, and is probably worth more than the £200m they have invested in us so far. The mortgages are being paid back through with Venky's personal or company funds.

The only issues we have to worry about is if SBOI do not renew the overdraft or call it in. As we are still in buisness and not in administration as well as having £4m injected a few months ago, we are ok at the moment.

Just now, Mattyblue said:

Clubs will get round it, especially bigger ones; bonuses, paying family members as ‘consultants’, you name it!

At the moment in L1 or L2 clubs have no income so not sure any of them want to get round it. From what i have heard so far, clubs are looking at cancelling contracts and renegotiate with who they want to keep etc. It will be interesting with the PFA stance on all of this, as if they are not agreeable and fans are not allowed back into grounds in the next 6 months, then potentially no L1 or L2 clubs will exist.

Championship there will be some that want to get round it if a similar 

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

We would have had to let our whole squad go. What was our wage bill there, was 8 million or was it 12? 

£15m

39 minutes ago, davulsukur said:

And they have voted to bring it in immediately 

Reduce the input most L1 and L2 owners have to put in to around £2-4m for the season which is doable.

Problem for the championship is that most owners of a championship clubs are looking likely to have to inject the club with £20-40m of funds at the same time most of their businesses are struggling.

With this backdrop  could see some championship chairman wanting a squad budget of £10-15m a season for over 21s. Would be a way of lowering all player salaries relatively easily and the PFA having no option but to accept. 

27 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Which clubs are you referring to? Middlesbrough appointed Warnock who is probably as good if not better than Hughton. Birmingham went for Karanka because they seem to like Spain at the moment and are also run by loons. Bristol City, Bournemouth and Watford are still vacant and Hughton is one of the front runners for all of them.

Bristol City have a head coach structure and seem to prefer having a young pliable coach in the dugout with Mark Ashton running things.

Hughton has done enough at this level to be able to name his terms and price and relax and wait for a club to match it. 

Its the age old story. Clubs want sexy and 60 odd year old British managers like McCarthy and Hughton don't get the pulses racing. They do get the job.done well though.

I think McCarthy will shortly come back in favour with most championship chairman, as everyone will be having to reduce their budgets this season.

Afteral at Ipswich he reduced the player wage budget by 60% and still kept the challenging for the playoffs each season. The problem is the fans got bored of it and wanted a change.

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Ya, that's why I always wondered why Allardyce signed him 

If we had got his strike partner Sam wanted in Robert Lewandowski, what a forward line those 2 would have been.

1 minute ago, arbitro said:

Thanks. You seem to know your stuff but from my fiscal idiots point of view are you saying if we went into administration the banks could take the land in India to wipe out the debt?

The only debt Rovers are liable for at the moment is our £15-20m overdraft. Remaining £200m from Venky's has been put into the club as share capital.

If we went into administration, Venky's would lose £200m. Our Administrators would need to sort out a new banking facility and pay the old overdraft with player sales. I am not sure what the overdraft is secured against, possibly season tickets sales or media income?

The above is why Administration won't happen. More likely for Venky's to sell us for £20m, or something similar to a friend.

Just now, Richard Oakley said:

These are VH Group accounts they'd be auditing. They make a profit not a loss. I'm pretty sure VH Group has a different start date to their fiscal year - I've never actually checked that.

Venkys London Ltd Accounts, which is the holding company for ourselves. 

Just now, tomphil said:

Always got the impression they are comfortable pouring around 10 million in per season. Surely even for them though when you are doubling or even trebling it again it'll cause problems.

1 season alone would reset the finances for about 5 years as long as they didn't go crazy and kept the Andersons & Kean types away.  No urgency for that though.

I think this is the season we have to get promotion, the £15m share issue in the next few weeks will pop their total share issue on Rovers to £200m. At that point we have to start to be looking at being promoted this season. At some point they will start listening to the accountants in VH Group or have an interest they are i all passionate about investing in and at that point our time is up.

Just now, tomphil said:

Back to the crazy days finance wise in terms of what is needed. 

I'm truly amazed we've any kind of budget without a big sale or two.  

If you think about it from 01/06/20 to 01/06/21 they are likely to have had to do share issues to the tune of £30m to keep the lights on. With that £30m you would have a £2-3m transfer budget and a wage budget no bigger than this season. If you want more you will need to fund from player sales.

With that sort of funding to keep the lights on i would want promotion next season as a guarantee of funding.

If you look at this year according to Venky's London Limited they have given the us £19m for the past season, with £4m being added in 2 months ago to cover Covid Costs. Normally they add £9m in August/September and £5m in January as our lump sum injections each year. So we would expect a share issue at some point in the next few weeks to fund things. With no season ticket income at the minute, we will need a cash injection of £15m in the next 2 weeks followed by £9m in January to keep us at the same level of funding as this year. 

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Yes there is some good players out there whether out of contract, possible cheap fee or possible loan deals. 

 

No I haven't at all. 

Well without Dack in the team for half a season we improved our goal record. Plus Graham not part of starting lineup much. Armstrong step up to the mark and produce the goods. Imagine if Dack was available we might produce better results and get that top 6. 

Our goal conceded was better than last pre Covid lockdown but after the lockdown Walton was pathetic. If you look at the stats used by Rovers Chat YouTube videos back this up. 

Last season he was available and we went on our worst ever losing streak. I seem to remember Armstrong and Graham also being available, as well as Reed etc so not sure you can say anything about us getting into the playoffs with a fit Dack this season..  

4 minutes ago, tomphil said:

I was under the impression they had to give those standard guarantees in order to get the accounts signed off ?

Might be wrong although even if not it wouldn't stop them pulling the plug if they had to.  I think in order for them to pull the plug the issue would have to be forced somehow so that had something to blame it on.

Otherwise it's odds on it would be a long slow squeeze then a quiet backdoor exit.

What normally happens with a loss making business is the following:

1. Auditors will ask the company for a forward projection for the next year.

2. If still loss making, auditors will ask the shareholders how they will fund losses to profitability or for the next year.

3. Auditors will then ask for written confirmation from shareholders that they will cover the losses as well as evidence of funds.

4. If Auditors are happy with answers and evidence of the above they will sign off the accounts. If they are not happy or evidence has not been forthcoming then there is a set procedure to follow. That has not happened so we can assume the auditors are happy and have approved the accounts.

This does not mean they have to fund the company for the next year as there are lots of wriggle room out of it. 

But during a transfer window there is absolutely no chance of either Venky's or the Bank of India placing us into administration.

24 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

Yes, there has been an official statement, every year but this. You are trying to make out that Venkys changing what they've done each new club fiscal year is no big deal. It is a big deal.

@phili Why would we be in administration?

Without the statement from VH Group committing to funding for an additional 12 months, the accounts would not be approved by the auditors, without this the business would thus no longer be classed as a going concern and the business would have to enter administration. As a director you have a fiduciary responsibility to act in a certain way.

Just now, briansol said:

Maddison has ability, but did poorly for Hull and only played 7 games (4 starts) with one goal to show for it. He's also rumoured to be a poor character.

Might be worth a punt, but I think Mowbray will be reserved bringing in a player that might disrupt the dressing room.

Possibly we need a few poorer characters to shake things up in the dressing room abit?