|
Post by wertongas on Feb 8, 2019 23:04:11 GMT
As far as i know the current owners are the only people in the world prepared to give a rovers manager a mid table budget in the modern inflated market. The old board took out a reckless high interest loan and prolonged a hopeless legal case against sainsbury's but luckily for them the present owners bailed them out. But they were good old gasheads mind you. All iv'e seen under wael is an improved football club something i never saw before. I agree with what you say about them saving the club, but they offered us much more and haven't delivered but keep making excuses and treating the fans like we are stupid and believe everything that is said. For example the owners say they don't need money but put an application in to convert three barns on the colony site clearly to make money. Some might say they are contradicting themselves other might say we aren't getting the whole truth . Why use sponsors to pay for ground improvements if AQ have the money to pay for it themselves.
|
|
|
Post by glengas on Feb 9, 2019 0:21:43 GMT
As far as i know the current owners are the only people in the world prepared to give a rovers manager a mid table budget in the modern inflated market. The old board took out a reckless high interest loan and prolonged a hopeless legal case against sainsbury's but luckily for them the present owners bailed them out. But they were good old gasheads mind you. All iv'e seen under wael is an improved football club something i never saw before. I agree with what you say about them saving the club, but they offered us much more and haven't delivered but keep making excuses and treating the fans like we are stupid and believe everything that is said. For example the owners say they don't need money but put an application in to convert three barns on the colony site clearly to make money. Some might say they are contradicting themselves other might say we aren't getting the whole truth . Why use sponsors to pay for ground improvements if AQ have the money to pay for it themselves. I am not quite sure why having a mid table budget is deemed so fantastic. We are the 9th best supported team in the division, so I would expect no less. There is no denying Higgs dug is into a hole with his pursuit of a stadium, but Sainsbury’s were not blameless for the predicament we found ourselves in. Chasing them through the courts was a case we would never win. But there is no denying the current owners bailed us out. As for improved football club, I guess you never saw us under the Dunforda then. From the brink of extinction at Eastville to a ground of our own back in Bristol. Don’t think we have moved on much from that time to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 9, 2019 7:40:52 GMT
Pretty sure Higgs etc always gave us a very competitive budget.
Do people remember what he allowed Dave Penny to when he came in? We were signing 2 or 3 players a day at times.
All the managers they signed (on paper) were good signings and were given the finances to bring in the players they wanted. I personally don’t remember a manager under the old board saying we never had money and always missing out on targets (stand to be corrected though).
This is just a response to the point of someone saying this board is the only one willing to give us a mid table budget, which I’m not sure is true tbh.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2019 7:55:10 GMT
As far as i know the current owners are the only people in the world prepared to give a rovers manager a mid table budget in the modern inflated market. The old board took out a reckless high interest loan and prolonged a hopeless legal case against sainsbury's but luckily for them the present owners bailed them out. But they were good old gasheads mind you. All iv'e seen under wael is an improved football club something i never saw before. BB, in what sense is this an improved football club? I'm not being aggressive I am genuinely interested in why you think this. I personally sense we are completely rudderless, we don't have any senior people at the club who really give two hoots about Rovers, our debt levels are significantly higher (and by the way to service Nick Higg's loan would have cost less than we are currently paying for DS's London office) They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2019 8:06:26 GMT
Pretty sure Higgs etc always gave us a very competitive budget. Do people remember what he allowed Dave Penny to when he came in? We were signing 2 or 3 players a day at times. All the managers they signed (on paper) were good signings and were given the finances to bring in the players they wanted. I personally don’t remember a manager under the old board saying we never had money and always missing out on targets (stand to be corrected though). This is just a response to the point of someone saying this board is the only one willing to give us a mid table budget, which I’m not sure is true tbh. Well higgs got out because he couldn't cope,also football has got very expensive compared to 10 years ago. Do you really believe we would have the playing budget we have now if higgs stayed on? Its not the owners fault that dc lost his way and signed some rubbish. If there are other owners willing to give us a mid table league one budget who and where are they?
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Feb 9, 2019 8:07:18 GMT
BB, in what sense is this an improved football club? I'm not being aggressive I am genuinely interested in why you think this. I personally sense we are completely rudderless, we don't have any senior people at the club who really give two hoots about Rovers, our debt levels are significantly higher (and by the way to service Nick Higg's loan would have cost less than we are currently paying for DS's London office) They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit! I agree. They arent perfect and they may not have delivered or started the big things, but they cant be faulted for doing the small things that needed doing and were ignored for so long in chasing the dream. They need to communicate better for sure, especially because football fans are needy. Many football fans want to spend other peoples money always have done, just the money needed now is a hell of a lot more The accounts are due march time (and the AGM) covering the period to June 2018
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2019 8:10:23 GMT
I agree with what you say about them saving the club, but they offered us much more and haven't delivered but keep making excuses and treating the fans like we are stupid and believe everything that is said. For example the owners say they don't need money but put an application in to convert three barns on the colony site clearly to make money. Some might say they are contradicting themselves other might say we aren't getting the whole truth . Why use sponsors to pay for ground improvements if AQ have the money to pay for it themselves. I am not quite sure why having a mid table budget is deemed so fantastic. We are the 9th best supported team in the division, so I would expect no less. There is no denying Higgs dug is into a hole with his pursuit of a stadium, but Sainsbury’s were not blameless for the predicament we found ourselves in. Chasing them through the courts was a case we would never win. But there is no denying the current owners bailed us out. As for improved football club, I guess you never saw us under the Dunforda then. From the brink of extinction at Eastville to a ground of our own back in Bristol. Don’t think we have moved on much from that time to be honest. If you expect no less than the present budget what were you saying going into the mansfield relegation game with the 2nd poorest team in league 2 and no subs worth bringing onto the pitch?
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 9, 2019 8:15:45 GMT
BB, in what sense is this an improved football club? I'm not being aggressive I am genuinely interested in why you think this. I personally sense we are completely rudderless, we don't have any senior people at the club who really give two hoots about Rovers, our debt levels are significantly higher (and by the way to service Nick Higg's loan would have cost less than we are currently paying for DS's London office) They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit! Pitch twice? Seriously, you’re making that point? They hired the cheapest company about who ruined the pitch. We actually had referees getting injured on it! Development squad - yep. Bar and shop all paid for by sponsors but it’s their tenure so fair point. Same as the stand (not that I see the stand as a positive, personally) Coaching set up - so what have the actually done here for the first team? I see people talk about this but we always had coaches. They also brought on a head of recruitment to sign players we can’t afford, thank goodness for that - he’s doing a top job judging by our league position. I think it’s harsh to say to Higgs he ‘bailed out’. He put the club up for sale and sold it to owners only that promised him they’d fulfill taking us forward and completing the stadium. Like you say, let’s wait for the accounts to come out, but it’s looking like in the space of 2/3 years they’ve run up debts as much as the old board had in their entire tenure. They’ve also put those debts against the Mem, so let’s not make it out like they’re doing a Steve Lansdown and writing it all off
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 9, 2019 8:21:15 GMT
Pretty sure Higgs etc always gave us a very competitive budget. Do people remember what he allowed Dave Penny to when he came in? We were signing 2 or 3 players a day at times. All the managers they signed (on paper) were good signings and were given the finances to bring in the players they wanted. I personally don’t remember a manager under the old board saying we never had money and always missing out on targets (stand to be corrected though). This is just a response to the point of someone saying this board is the only one willing to give us a mid table budget, which I’m not sure is true tbh. Well higgs got out because he couldn't cope,also football has got very expensive compared to 10 years ago. Do you really believe we would have the playing budget we have now if higgs stayed on? Its not the owners fault that dc lost his way and signed some rubbish. If there are other owners willing to give us a mid table league one budget who and where are they? I reckon it would be a midtable budget, yes. Isn’t it their fault? Sorry the owners take the blame also for what the manager signs. If they can’t give him the budget for certain players, the manager has to go for others. Whilst it’s 70% on DC, if he worked with a bottom 6 budget previously, what did you expect him to sign? Regarding the last point, well firstly the old board I believe would have, as they always did. Always. It’s very easy to say where are they when Wael owns the club and refuses anyone else to get involved. If they put us up for sale and we were bought out, I’d happily make you a bet (if we were in L1) that the new owners would give us a midtable L1 budget.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Feb 9, 2019 9:33:19 GMT
They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit! I agree. They arent perfect and they may not have delivered or started the big things, but they cant be faulted for doing the small things that needed doing and were ignored for so long in chasing the dream. They need to communicate better for sure, especially because football fans are needy. Many football fans want to spend other peoples money always have done, just the money needed now is a hell of a lot more The accounts are due march time (and the AGM) covering the period to June 2018 And here in lies the problem with BRFC and it’s fans, and this isn’t my point, but one someone I spoke to said the other day which resonates. At BRFC we are always happy with our lot, however bad it is, we never call the owners to account for failings which should have happened, and if we do, it’s only a small minority of fans which means it never carries that much weight. Look at some clubs fans, like BCFC for example, they will mass protest, rip seats out of the stands and make a right racket about what they believe the owners/board should be doing about their club, look how they treated Coterill for example. Now I am not advocating some of that behaviour whatsoever, but in cases where it’s happened, it’s got results for them.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Feb 9, 2019 9:41:27 GMT
BB, in what sense is this an improved football club? I'm not being aggressive I am genuinely interested in why you think this. I personally sense we are completely rudderless, we don't have any senior people at the club who really give two hoots about Rovers, our debt levels are significantly higher (and by the way to service Nick Higg's loan would have cost less than we are currently paying for DS's London office) They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit! We had a decent pitch for a good couple of years prior to the debacle 18 months ago when the ALQs got involved with it. Dev Squad - fair one. Renovations were mainly paid for via an insurance claim for a water leak and then contributions from members of the 1883 who were tradesmen. Temp stands - actually a good idea from Tom, but they cost £10k to erect and the clubs rate card on the sponsorship is £10k per stand. It’s cost neutral. Source - Tom himself. Club shop - paid for by Macron - Source - TG. All the other increase in staff, management and coaches not forgetting the office in London are not being paid for by the ALQs. All they are doing is adding it to the loss on the balance sheet which Hani has to guarantee and is guaranteed via the charge against the Mem plus interest. Why can’t people actually see and register that? Under this ownership we are being put under more financial pressure than in any other previous board. At the current run rate it’s perilous.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 9, 2019 9:45:12 GMT
I agree. They arent perfect and they may not have delivered or started the big things, but they cant be faulted for doing the small things that needed doing and were ignored for so long in chasing the dream. They need to communicate better for sure, especially because football fans are needy. Many football fans want to spend other peoples money always have done, just the money needed now is a hell of a lot more The accounts are due march time (and the AGM) covering the period to June 2018 And here in lies the problem with BRFC and it’s fans, and this isn’t my point, but one someone I spoke to said the other day which resonates. At BRFC we are always happy with our lot, however bad it is, we never call the owners to account for failings which should have happened, and if we do, it’s only a small minority of fans which means it never carries that much weight. Look at some clubs fans, like BCFC for example, they will mass protest, rip seats out of the stands and make a right racket about what they believe the owners/board should be doing about their club, look how they treated Coterill for example. Now I am not advocating some of that behaviour whatsoever, but in cases where it’s happened, it’s got results for them. I think that's a bit of a myth. Every club has its section of whiny gits who will never be satisfied. Every club has a section that whines when the time is right. Every club has a section that never whines. Linking general performance with whininess is fallacious, imo. I mean are you really suggesting that City are where they are now because they're a bit whinier than us? That doesn't even stand up to the barest scrutiny. City didn't achieve coz they got rid of Cotterill/whoever. They achieved coz they got rid of Cotterill/whoever and had £100M.
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Feb 9, 2019 10:22:05 GMT
They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit! We had a decent pitch for a good couple of years prior to the debacle 18 months ago when the ALQs got involved with it. Dev Squad - fair one. Renovations were mainly paid for via an insurance claim for a water leak and then contributions from members of the 1883 who were tradesmen. Temp stands - actually a good idea from Tom, but they cost £10k to erect and the clubs rate card on the sponsorship is £10k per stand. It’s cost neutral. Source - Tom himself. Club shop - paid for by Macron - Source - TG. All the other increase in staff, management and coaches not forgetting the office in London are not being paid for by the ALQs. All they are doing is adding it to the loss on the balance sheet which Hani has to guarantee and is guaranteed via the charge against the Mem plus interest. Why can’t people actually see and register that? Under this ownership we are being put under more financial pressure than in any other previous board. At the current run rate it’s perilous. Whether they paid for the bars directly or not is irrelevant to some degree. They needed doing and were ignored for so long especially as it is a revenue stream. Just a case of the previous owners/board doing very litte because the fans will come and buy a pint regardless. As for the finances well, surely that all depends on what the AQs strategy is and/or what they want back should they wish to get out. Football clubs and its fans and not just at Rovers are stuck in this weird cycle of wanting and having to spend money, but not sure entirely where it is supposed to come from. You either need a mega rich owner which no one is entitled to, or the club has to find a way in which to prosper without it. We are stuck in a limbo situation at the moment with no obvious prospect of a new stadium or rebuilt Mem, but at the same time some fans demand more money be spent or the AQs sell to some who will spend despite not knowing or perhaps understanding there may be no one wanting to or no reason for anyone else to take us over
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 9, 2019 10:28:53 GMT
Football clubs and its fans and not just at Rovers are stuck in this weird cycle of wanting and having to spend money, but not sure entirely where it is supposed to come from. It's weirder than that. Not only do fans complain that we don't spend money. They complain about what it is spent on. Then they complain that we're spending it. Then they pretend it's not real money, and so complain that we're not spending any. They also complain that we aren't creative about raising money. So when we raise money for improvements in a creative way, pretend the improvements don't count, coz the money was raised in a creative way.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 9, 2019 10:54:08 GMT
I agree. They arent perfect and they may not have delivered or started the big things, but they cant be faulted for doing the small things that needed doing and were ignored for so long in chasing the dream. They need to communicate better for sure, especially because football fans are needy. Many football fans want to spend other peoples money always have done, just the money needed now is a hell of a lot more The accounts are due march time (and the AGM) covering the period to June 2018 And here in lies the problem with BRFC and it’s fans, and this isn’t my point, but one someone I spoke to said the other day which resonates. At BRFC we are always happy with our lot, however bad it is, we never call the owners to account for failings which should have happened, and if we do, it’s only a small minority of fans which means it never carries that much weight. Look at some clubs fans, like BCFC for example, they will mass protest, rip seats out of the stands and make a right racket about what they believe the owners/board should be doing about their club, look how they treated Coterill for example. Now I am not advocating some of that behaviour whatsoever, but in cases where it’s happened, it’s got results for them. When did that happen? As far as Cotterill did he really get anymore abuse that than the toxic atmosphere created when Buckle was in charge?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 9, 2019 10:58:35 GMT
They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit! We had a decent pitch for a good couple of years prior to the debacle 18 months ago when the ALQs got involved with it. Dev Squad - fair one. Renovations were mainly paid for via an insurance claim for a water leak and then contributions from members of the 1883 who were tradesmen. Temp stands - actually a good idea from Tom, but they cost £10k to erect and the clubs rate card on the sponsorship is £10k per stand. It’s cost neutral. Source - Tom himself. Club shop - paid for by Macron - Source - TG. All the other increase in staff, management and coaches not forgetting the office in London are not being paid for by the ALQs. All they are doing is adding it to the loss on the balance sheet which Hani has to guarantee and is guaranteed via the charge against the Mem plus interest. Why can’t people actually see and register that?
Under this ownership we are being put under more financial pressure than in any other previous board. At the current run rate it’s perilous. But that was no different than what NH did, in fact it's the same at most club's, there's only an issue when the owners can't manage the debt, you'd have to hope a family of investment bankers don't want a bankrupt football club on there hands. The question surely has to be why did the ALQ's get involved in Rovers?
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 9, 2019 12:19:40 GMT
We had a decent pitch for a good couple of years prior to the debacle 18 months ago when the ALQs got involved with it. Dev Squad - fair one. Renovations were mainly paid for via an insurance claim for a water leak and then contributions from members of the 1883 who were tradesmen. Temp stands - actually a good idea from Tom, but they cost £10k to erect and the clubs rate card on the sponsorship is £10k per stand. It’s cost neutral. Source - Tom himself. Club shop - paid for by Macron - Source - TG. All the other increase in staff, management and coaches not forgetting the office in London are not being paid for by the ALQs. All they are doing is adding it to the loss on the balance sheet which Hani has to guarantee and is guaranteed via the charge against the Mem plus interest. Why can’t people actually see and register that?
Under this ownership we are being put under more financial pressure than in any other previous board. At the current run rate it’s perilous. But that was no different than what NH did, in fact it's the same at most club's, there's only an issue when the owners can't manage the debt, you'd have to hope a family of investment bankers don't want a bankrupt football club on there hands. The question surely has to be why did the ALQ's get involved in Rovers? Well this is it isn’t it? The question we all gave to wonder. I do believe they came in with the best intentions, but things got too expensive for them, some issues arose & their commitment/interest for the club has dropped ever since - that’s my opinion anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2019 12:38:34 GMT
Well higgs got out because he couldn't cope,also football has got very expensive compared to 10 years ago. Do you really believe we would have the playing budget we have now if higgs stayed on? Its not the owners fault that dc lost his way and signed some rubbish. If there are other owners willing to give us a mid table league one budget who and where are they? I reckon it would be a midtable budget, yes. Isn’t it their fault? Sorry the owners take the blame also for what the manager signs. If they can’t give him the budget for certain players, the manager has to go for others. Whilst it’s 70% on DC, if he worked with a bottom 6 budget previously, what did you expect him to sign? Regarding the last point, well firstly the old board I believe would have, as they always did. Always. It’s very easy to say where are they when Wael owns the club and refuses anyone else to get involved. If they put us up for sale and we were bought out, I’d happily make you a bet (if we were in L1) that the new owners would give us a midtable L1 budget. So the owners take the blame for signing players because the budget they set should actually be higher? Its about getting what you pay for imo and since we got into league one we rarely have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2019 12:44:20 GMT
They have relayed the pitch twice,put a sprinkler system in,created a dev squad,renovated the bar and shop,modernized the coaching set up and built temporary stands which have increased seating capacity. Not the big stuff we all wanted but nothing at all seemed to happen before. Regarding nick higgs and his loan,whatever amount it was we were heading for trouble and he couldn't handle it so he bailed out. Not sure when the latest accounts are out but we can better gauge what the debt it then although it needs to be balanced with the debts throughout lower league football. People speak as if were the only club in the country not in profit! We had a decent pitch for a good couple of years prior to the debacle 18 months ago when the ALQs got involved with it. Dev Squad - fair one. Renovations were mainly paid for via an insurance claim for a water leak and then contributions from members of the 1883 who were tradesmen. Temp stands - actually a good idea from Tom, but they cost £10k to erect and the clubs rate card on the sponsorship is £10k per stand. It’s cost neutral. Source - Tom himself. Club shop - paid for by Macron - Source - TG. All the other increase in staff, management and coaches not forgetting the office in London are not being paid for by the ALQs. All they are doing is adding it to the loss on the balance sheet which Hani has to guarantee and is guaranteed via the charge against the Mem plus interest. Why can’t people actually see and register that? Under this ownership we are being put under more financial pressure than in any other previous board. At the current run rate it’s perilous. So regarding the charge against the mem. Is it illegal? Does anyone else use this debt strategy? Can i do it with my house and when it reaches its value walk away without paying anything? Or better still charge myself interest and actually make money on my own debt. Is a high interest loan a much better idea than the charge?
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 9, 2019 15:56:49 GMT
I reckon it would be a midtable budget, yes. Isn’t it their fault? Sorry the owners take the blame also for what the manager signs. If they can’t give him the budget for certain players, the manager has to go for others. Whilst it’s 70% on DC, if he worked with a bottom 6 budget previously, what did you expect him to sign? Regarding the last point, well firstly the old board I believe would have, as they always did. Always. It’s very easy to say where are they when Wael owns the club and refuses anyone else to get involved. If they put us up for sale and we were bought out, I’d happily make you a bet (if we were in L1) that the new owners would give us a midtable L1 budget. So the owners take the blame for signing players because the budget they set should actually be higher? Did you even read what I said?
|
|