|
Post by knowall on Dec 8, 2017 18:07:24 GMT
The 'Security' aspect really is a red herring - and they are already risking their own money - ask any banker especially one who has dealt with distress sales. And when the next accounts are published you can be sure the same assurances will be there - as they have been in the years before the Al-Qadi's came along. If you think the levels of deficit are higher now then it shows the commitment being given by our funders and the use of 'tipping point' etc IS scaremongering. Were you so worried about the future five years ago under Higgs and Co? - well you should have been because that is when the debts were being racked up! Well it was easier *not* to worry under Higgs and co as they appeared to be using their own money to bank roll the club, primarily funding players when needed. It seemed to me that they needed to produce a successful club in order to get their investment back so had some 'skin in the game' so to speak. Also there was the fact they were local businessmen amd were fans of the club so could be reasonably trusted not to do something like sell our ground from under our feet. Apparently they nearly took us to the wall but I guess I cut them some slack because they always dug deep when we needed players and they tried their best to leave a legacy of a decent stadium, they were very naive dealing with a machine like Sainsburys and that proved to be their downfall. The new owners are far harder to trust, mainly because they are not local, they are not supporters and they have an investment banking background which rings alarm bells. Like Higgs and co they have spoken of grand plans and failed to deliver on them. They can at any time sell the stadium to recoup money and the question I have is: why wouldnt they? If you are Hani and have no interest in football why wouldnt you sell the ground when enough is enough? What is stopping you? Why would you care? So far Hani remains elusive, it would be a welcome move if he were to speak to GT and we could get an idea of where the organ grinder sees the club going as Wael and Hamer are mere monkeys. The fact that he won't bothers me greatly, quite frankly. So until I see more commitment than a lick of paint in the bogs I will continue to worry about our future. I find it hard to think of us being 'saved' by the AQ's as although we still have a club it is basically on life support: Stadium plans up in smoke, an infrastrcuture even our own manager says is 30 years out of date, not much chance of achieving significant investment in that area and a club wrapped up in a straight jacket of debt so tight that it now puts us out of the reach of any sane investor. Doesn't feel much like being 'saved' really. You are a dream! with a short memory to boot. 'Primarily funding players when needed' -from the money for Lambert for instance 'trusted not to do something like sell our ground from under our feet' - they did! to the Al-Qadi's 'they nearly took us to the wall' - yes they did -almost off the cliff. 'they were naive' - never a truer word - and you trusted them! 'until I see more commitment than a lick of paint' - £12million mainly bailing out Higgs & Co not enough for you? and how much time do you spend in the 'bogs'? 'Wael and Hamer are mere monkeys' - somewhat disrespectful - what does that make you? 'infrastructure our manager says is out of date' - and whose fault is that? Not the current owners! - have you studied our Academy lately? 'not much chance of achieving investment' - I hope you will be humble when you are proved wrong 'doesn't feel much like being saved' - but that IS what has happened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 18:21:22 GMT
So, they have saved us from administration, they have transformed the back room staffing, they have bought a training ground, the Mem will be redeveloped one day,and they have no intention of calling in the debt. We owe £12m, and debts increase by £1m - £2m per annum, but they are in this for the long term. Very reassuring. But what do they ever get out of this apparently very one-sided deal? You can trust in the ALQs all you like, but they're not a charity for poor deprived football clubs. What's in it for them? Someone must know. Apparently they're taking £14k per week.I'd be in it long term for that.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 8, 2017 18:24:21 GMT
Why do you have to keep on bringing up the old BoD's failings, it's here and now that matters not the past. You seem to be under the impression the ALQ's are going to pour endless money into the club with no clear signs how they are ever going to be repaid, or even start to get a return on their investment, even though they have no real connection with Rovers or even Bristol, to top all Hani doesn't even like football!
My money is on the ALQ's already working on a get out plan, hopefully, we'll still have a club to support when they do move on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 18:27:20 GMT
Well it was easier *not* to worry under Higgs and co as they appeared to be using their own money to bank roll the club, primarily funding players when needed. It seemed to me that they needed to produce a successful club in order to get their investment back so had some 'skin in the game' so to speak. Also there was the fact they were local businessmen amd were fans of the club so could be reasonably trusted not to do something like sell our ground from under our feet. Apparently they nearly took us to the wall but I guess I cut them some slack because they always dug deep when we needed players and they tried their best to leave a legacy of a decent stadium, they were very naive dealing with a machine like Sainsburys and that proved to be their downfall. The new owners are far harder to trust, mainly because they are not local, they are not supporters and they have an investment banking background which rings alarm bells. Like Higgs and co they have spoken of grand plans and failed to deliver on them. They can at any time sell the stadium to recoup money and the question I have is: why wouldnt they? If you are Hani and have no interest in football why wouldnt you sell the ground when enough is enough? What is stopping you? Why would you care? So far Hani remains elusive, it would be a welcome move if he were to speak to GT and we could get an idea of where the organ grinder sees the club going as Wael and Hamer are mere monkeys. The fact that he won't bothers me greatly, quite frankly. So until I see more commitment than a lick of paint in the bogs I will continue to worry about our future. I find it hard to think of us being 'saved' by the AQ's as although we still have a club it is basically on life support: Stadium plans up in smoke, an infrastrcuture even our own manager says is 30 years out of date, not much chance of achieving significant investment in that area and a club wrapped up in a straight jacket of debt so tight that it now puts us out of the reach of any sane investor. Doesn't feel much like being 'saved' really. You are a dream! with a short memory to boot. 'Primarily funding players when needed' -from the money for Lambert for instance 'trusted not to do something like sell our ground from under our feet' - they did! to the Al-Qadi's 'they nearly took us to the wall' - yes they did -almost off the cliff. 'they were naive' - never a truer word - and you trusted them! 'until I see more commitment than a lick of paint' - £12million mainly bailing out Higgs & Co not enough for you? and how much time do you spend in the 'bogs'? 'Wael and Hamer are mere monkeys' - somewhat disrespectful - what does that make you? 'infrastructure our manager says is out of date' - and whose fault is that? Not the current owners! - have you studied our Academy lately? 'not much chance of achieving investment' - I hope you will be humble when you are proved wrong 'doesn't feel much like being saved' - but that IS what has happened. Fair points but they sold the club which came with the ground, just selling the ground and leaving us homeless is different as you know, which is what he was implying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 18:53:45 GMT
You are a dream! with a short memory to boot. 'Primarily funding players when needed' -from the money for Lambert for instance 'trusted not to do something like sell our ground from under our feet' - they did! to the Al-Qadi's 'they nearly took us to the wall' - yes they did -almost off the cliff. 'they were naive' - never a truer word - and you trusted them! 'until I see more commitment than a lick of paint' - £12million mainly bailing out Higgs & Co not enough for you? and how much time do you spend in the 'bogs'? 'Wael and Hamer are mere monkeys' - somewhat disrespectful - what does that make you? 'infrastructure our manager says is out of date' - and whose fault is that? Not the current owners! - have you studied our Academy lately? 'not much chance of achieving investment' - I hope you will be humble when you are proved wrong 'doesn't feel much like being saved' - but that IS what has happened. Fair points but they sold the club which came with the ground, just selling the ground and leaving us homeless is different as you know, which is what he was implying. Yes and I notice the one point which wasn't answered is the one I would most like assurance on- why would Hani not sell the ground to get his money back? Why should he care about making a success of Bristol Rovers? He doesn't need the club to be a success to get the 12 million back, just find someone who will pay 12 million for the land which probably wouldn't be difficult. Although to pick up the point the poster made earlier the interest situation is odd as that is being rolled up in the debt which seems to have a natural cap of 12 million so I am not sure how they can profit from interest being part of the 12 million loan.
|
|
|
Post by knowall on Dec 8, 2017 19:44:50 GMT
So, they have saved us from administration, they have transformed the back room staffing, they have bought a training ground, the Mem will be redeveloped one day,and they have no intention of calling in the debt. We owe £12m, and debts increase by £1m - £2m per annum, but they are in this for the long term. Very reassuring. But what do they ever get out of this apparently very one-sided deal? You can trust in the ALQs all you like, but they're not a charity for poor deprived football clubs. What's in it for them? Someone must know. Apparently they're taking £14k per week.I'd be in it long term for that. IF you put up £12million to save a football Club who would blame you?
|
|
|
Post by knowall on Dec 8, 2017 19:48:22 GMT
Fair points but they sold the club which came with the ground, just selling the ground and leaving us homeless is different as you know, which is what he was implying. Yes and I notice the one point which wasn't answered is the one I would most like assurance on- why would Hani not sell the ground to get his money back? Why should he care about making a success of Bristol Rovers? He doesn't need the club to be a success to get the 12 million back, just find someone who will pay 12 million for the land which probably wouldn't be difficult. Although to pick up the point the poster made earlier the interest situation is odd as that is being rolled up in the debt which seems to have a natural cap of 12 million so I am not sure how they can profit from interest being part of the 12 million loan. Because your first point does not deserve an answer - it is pure speculation and the second point is nonsense - there is no cap - ask your accountant
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 19:52:08 GMT
So, they have saved us from administration, they have transformed the back room staffing, they have bought a training ground, the Mem will be redeveloped one day,and they have no intention of calling in the debt. We owe £12m, and debts increase by £1m - £2m per annum, but they are in this for the long term. Very reassuring. But what do they ever get out of this apparently very one-sided deal? You can trust in the ALQs all you like, but they're not a charity for poor deprived football clubs. What's in it for them? Someone must know. Apparently they're taking £14k per week.I'd be in it long term for that. Where's the £14K per week come from?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 8, 2017 20:02:37 GMT
6% p.a on the £12m debt?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Dec 8, 2017 20:05:26 GMT
It's interest on debt they owe themselves that they're not even taking.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Dec 8, 2017 20:33:16 GMT
So, they have saved us from administration, they have transformed the back room staffing, they have bought a training ground, the Mem will be redeveloped one day,and they have no intention of calling in the debt. We owe £12m, and debts increase by £1m - £2m per annum, but they are in this for the long term. Very reassuring. But what do they ever get out of this apparently very one-sided deal? You can trust in the ALQs all you like, but they're not a charity for poor deprived football clubs. What's in it for them? Someone must know. I don't know, as a guess I would say that they need additional income streams of match day and non match day revenue in order to provide a return on the investment and also give something to the club, such as additional conference facilities. This is why I think the UWE fell through, they wanted to keep a higher share of the profit which meant the return Dwane Sports were after did not add up. On a positive, if there is one, it will mean there is an incentive to work up alternatives quicker. Oh, and don't forget the intangibles such as Wael's interest in football. Some may joke that we are his plaything, but thst isn't all bad.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Dec 8, 2017 20:46:12 GMT
I'm not struggling at all. I didn't say it wasn't true, the point I was making was that you have chosen this thing to report of all the things you could have chosen. That's true, too. And I have chosen to post that, of all the things I could have posted. So, read my posts, what I actually say, before you talk bullshit about them. You can post what you like, and I can say what I like about what you post. That's the point of a forum. Again, I haven't said you can't post this stuff, so read what I actually post before you talk bullshit about that, too. Then you put it in context. I stated what was said. There was no other context in which to allay concerns. Yet still you can't accept people daring to state the obvious, which is that the family are no longer interested in our club. I also didn't say you lied. I also chose to post what I did because as I have said before, we have had so much bullshit from our present and previous owners I won't believe anything about future funding until it happens. I also didnt say that i couldnt post what i want. I asked you if the rules had changed. Glad to see they haven't. In other news, the worry about the debts is that under the previous regime, they were about £7.5m from memory. In just under two years they have increased to about £11-12m. That is totally unsustainable, and if people aren't worried about that, then don't be surprised if you will need to find something else to do on a Saturday.
|
|
|
Post by dinsdale on Dec 8, 2017 20:51:25 GMT
Not really. It's one sentence out of context. Gasincider obviously made a choice of what to post. Presumably SH said a load of other stuff, that hasn't been posted. Without any context about what else was said and why it hasn't been posted, and given Gasincider's posting history then Slide away's post seems like a fair assessment to me. You really are struggling to justify your contribution about my post. A word of advice. When in a hole stop digging. As always I have stated the truth. Even Henbury has backed it up. If there is a new rule about what we can post, can you in your role of moderator let us all know. If not, as usual, I'll post what I like within the sensible existing boundaries. And it will always be the truth. sh** stiring tripe.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Dec 8, 2017 20:54:26 GMT
I don't know, as a guess I would say that they need additional income streams of match day and non match day revenue in order to provide a return on the investment and also give something to the club, such as additional conference facilities. This is why I think the UWE fell through, they wanted to keep a higher share of the profit which meant the return Dwane Sports were after did not add up If that was the case why did it take so long after the feasibility study was received to decide it wasn't viable? Remember, before it was called off, and after the feasibility study had been seen, the UWE were invited to Jordan to conclude the deal. Seems strange to do that if the project was no longer a goer. When pressed for a reason why it was called off, SH stated that UWE had failed to meet Rovers deadline for completion of the deal. Well, it must have been pretty close to fruition to say that. The vice chancellor the following day on radio Bristol said he was shocked as he had been waiting for heads of terms from us. The truth is, we don't yet know the truth.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Dec 8, 2017 20:57:20 GMT
What, reporting what the chairman said?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Dec 8, 2017 21:06:45 GMT
I'm not struggling at all. I didn't say it wasn't true, the point I was making was that you have chosen this thing to report of all the things you could have chosen. That's true, too. And I have chosen to post that, of all the things I could have posted. So, read my posts, what I actually say, before you talk bullshit about them. You can post what you like, and I can say what I like about what you post. That's the point of a forum. Again, I haven't said you can't post this stuff, so read what I actually post before you talk bullshit about that, too. Then you put it in context. I stated what was said. There was no other context in which to allay concerns. Yet still you can't accept people daring to state the obvious, which is that the family are no longer interested in our club. I also didn't say you lied. I also chose to post what I did because as I have said before, we have had so much bullshit from our present and previous owners I won't believe anything about future funding until it happens. I also didnt say that i couldnt post what i want. I asked you if the rules had changed. Glad to see they haven't. In other news, the worry about the debts is that under the previous regime, they were about £7.5m from memory. In just under two years they have increased to about £11-12m. That is totally unsustainable, and if people aren't worried about that, then don't be surprised if you will need to find something else to do on a Saturday. Don't make up stuff about what I can accept. You posted on a forum, and I replied.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Dec 8, 2017 21:07:50 GMT
So one gave the negative spin and one gave the positive spin. Just more confusion for everyone else which only adds to the growing tensions and bad atmosphere here and around the club. The way I see it is we are in league one and have a very good manager on our hands. Compare that to a few seasons back when Ward was about to step down from management and we had 8 games left to save our season and we were getting quotes from Higgs saying "relegation is not an option" and we all knew what happened next! I don't blame DC for our relegation before anyone points our we got the same manager who relegated us. Compare where we are now and where we were then and what was about to happen, I am delighted how things are going for us. We have seen many dark days at our club and where we are now is certainly no where near those dark days so I just cant comprehend how people are acting like we just been relegated to the downs league. I may be called a rose tinter or be accused of burying my head in the sand but I cant control the board and what happens on or off the pitch. The only thing I can control is the effort I put in on a match day to support my team. As long as the team puts in 100% win, lose or draw, I would be happy. I am not itk about off field matters. Some on here claim to be and some of them obviously have hidden agendas. I thought we all want the same thing which is to see us succeed. Some however look intent at destroying our club. Here is to 3 points tomorrow! Great post and exactly as I see it. You’ve just pretty much summed up all the bits of everything I’ve been saying for weeks in one one very well put post. UTG !!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 21:25:58 GMT
It's interest on debt they owe themselves that they're not even taking. According to Knowall they are. And he doesn’t blame them after ‘investing’ £12 million to ‘save’ Rovers.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Dec 8, 2017 21:40:06 GMT
It's interest on debt they owe themselves that they're not even taking. According to Knowall they are. And he doesn’t blame them after ‘investing’ £12 million to ‘save’ Rovers. Pretty sure SH said on Twentyman a couple of weeks ago, that they're making the provision for it, but not actually taking any money, as some sort of accounting thing in case we ever make a profit in the future. or something.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Dec 8, 2017 21:47:52 GMT
According to Knowall they are. And he doesn’t blame them after ‘investing’ £12 million to ‘save’ Rovers. Pretty sure SH said on Twentyman a couple of weeks ago, that they're making the provision for it, but not actually taking any money, as some sort of accounting thing in case we ever make a profit in the future. or something. He did indeed, he termed it 'notional' interest and rubbished a rumoured figure of 3.5% (from memory) which doesn't mean that it isn't higher or that interest is being charged on interest, we don't know. As far as repayments go, the last set of accounts specifically stated that the money will not be recouped until BRFC are able to pay it.
|
|