|
Post by stuart1974 on May 5, 2018 21:11:40 GMT
[/quote]Stuart, at the time I didn’t know any of the Agenda for Change team but I strongly agreed with their objectives the first of which was to “source and inject fresh financial capital for BRFC”. I liked the theme of “All of us working together” and the fact that those behind the RAFC were prepared to put a lot of thought and work into their vision for Rovers as evidenced by the documents “Blueprint for change” and “Seven Point Plan”. They wanted a polished, professional football club and took the trouble to explore all the possibilities rather than sit back in a comfort zone and watch as Rovers declined.
Although I realise I am in a very small minority I would like to see Wael’s blueprint for the future because for me his interviews and and statements are much too woolly and essentially add up to nothing. If we could see and understand what the vision is we could all be confident and speak boldly about the future rather than, as Darrell Clarke did in this interview, trot out the timid old line about work going on “behind the scenes”.
For someone to put up £20 million for stadium development as a loan and expect a rate of return of say 5% over 20 years the cost to Rovers would be about £1.6 million per year. How would that be paid on top of the football club losses ?
But for someone interested in football, with a large amount of surplus cash and wanting to get into the English football pyramid it might be made to work. If Dwane Sports capitalised their £15 million loan and reduced their shareholding to 40% the nominal value of the club would be £ 37.5 million. If an investor put in £19.5 million cash for 52% a further £7.5 million could be leveraged at a reasonable rate to provide a fund of £27 million for redeveloping the stadium, incorporating income producing assets such as a hotel and for working capital. With a modern stadium, manageable debt, and substantial non-football income the club would have a sporting chance of reaching the Championship and possibly going further.
[/quote]
Thanks Swiss.
I guess my view is that is there someone out there with that sort of finance who is both willing to invest it in a League 1 club and not have total control, even if it a majority. And would Dwane Sports after their initial groundwork and their own investment be willing to take a smaller share. By introducing another major shareholder there could be a disagreement over the future and lead to backroom issues dominating the direction of the club.
In my mind a redevelopment of the Mem would cost c.£25m but have restricted commercial income whereas a new build would cost double that but give a greater opportunity to increase non match day revenue.
My suggestion about loans wasn't in respect of a single investor. By taking away the actual football side of things and seeing it as a stand alone commercial property investment rather than investing in BRFC, we can get away from needing very rich football people and look to get a number of small, medium and large investors (such as pension funds, banks, businesses and even fans).
Having several investors with different rates of return and redemption periods we are spreading the cost and liability of singletons calling in their loans.
However, I am probsbly being incredibly naive and not knowing the actual plans for investment it is just academic anyway.
Hopefully some news will come this summer.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on May 6, 2018 2:25:11 GMT
if i told you what it really means you would be impressed So you got a police record then....
|
|
|
Post by Captain Jayho on May 6, 2018 10:18:30 GMT
Well the minute they write off some of the debt is the minute we know they are ultimately spending their money and not ours. Did Higgs, Dunford, Jelf and Ware write off debt? Genuine question. I have absolutely no idea. But then they also never had the club at the levels of debt that we currently sit at so not sure how relevant that is to the current situation? You can obviously argue the toss for each of the relative approaches - and maybe I'm being unrealistic here but if the current incumbents want to keep spending and allowing the debt to balloon out to hitherto unheard of levels would it not be great to have at least some small understanding of how they intend to ultimately get it under control and even reduce it at some point in the future? Sure, they own the club and we are just the fans. I get that...
|
|
|
Post by LJG on May 6, 2018 10:24:18 GMT
Did Higgs, Dunford, Jelf and Ware write off debt? Genuine question. I have absolutely no idea. But then they also never had the club at the levels of debt that we currently sit at so not sure how relevant that is to the current situation? You can obviously argue the toss for each of the relative approaches - and maybe I'm being unrealistic here but if the current incumbents want to keep spending and allowing the debt to balloon out to hitherto unheard of levels would it not be great to have at least some small understanding of how they intend to ultimately get it under control and even reduce it at some point in the future? Sure, they own the club and we are just the fans. I get that... Sure I don't disagree with your last question. My general point on this thread has been that what real practical difference does the level of debt make to the day to day running of the club? And why is the debt being written off suddenly a show of loyalty required when it's never troubled anyone before?
|
|
|
Post by Captain Jayho on May 6, 2018 10:50:53 GMT
I have absolutely no idea. But then they also never had the club at the levels of debt that we currently sit at so not sure how relevant that is to the current situation? You can obviously argue the toss for each of the relative approaches - and maybe I'm being unrealistic here but if the current incumbents want to keep spending and allowing the debt to balloon out to hitherto unheard of levels would it not be great to have at least some small understanding of how they intend to ultimately get it under control and even reduce it at some point in the future? Sure, they own the club and we are just the fans. I get that... Sure I don't disagree with your last question. My general point on this thread has been that what real practical difference does the level of debt make to the day to day running of the club? And why is the debt being written off suddenly a show of loyalty required when it's never troubled anyone before? On the day to day running of the club the level of debt makes no difference whatsoever. But if you're looking long or even medium term then I'd say it's pretty important! Different people look at different horizons I guess. And the reason the writing off of debt hasn't troubled me overly before is because the level of debt has been far lower and has therefore appeared to be under at least a modicum of control - albeit I did get more than a little nervous when Sir Nicholas of Higgs dived into the pool with the loan sharks.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on May 6, 2018 12:27:38 GMT
Well the minute they write off some of the debt is the minute we know they are ultimately spending their money and not ours. Did Higgs, Dunford, Jelf and Ware write off debt? Genuine question. LJG, the answer to your question is yes they did. In order to attract Nick Higgs to invest in the club Geoff Dunford and Ron Craig gifted him some of their shares. Nick subsequently put cash in as loans which he would have been entitled to have repaid but he later converted some of the loans to shares and of course those shares were worthless when Dwane Sports took over so that money was lost. Also, the 2016 accounts revealed that the directors who had put money into Rovers via interest bearing loans and bonds wrote off interest of £551,986 to which they were entitled. And as far as I know when Martin Flook and Barry Bradshaw handed Rovers to Geoff and Denis Dunford in 1986 no money changed hands and Martin and Barry wrote off all the cash they had put in during their time at the helm. Your analogy about race horses was a good one and highly relevant to football. This is why I say football is a place for surplus cash you can afford to lose not cash from which you are relying on getting a monetary return. I know this very well because I have put a lot of money into horses and got a lot less money back BUT I have had a hell of a lot of fun out of it.
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on May 6, 2018 18:15:14 GMT
As I've said previously I hope the owners are looking as closely at improving revenues as they are on increasing costs. Investment is needed in the bricks and mortar infrastructure of the club as without that and a plan employing a head of recruitment is superfluous to our needs (probably like the office in London). Hopefully I'll be cheering the owners following the announcement of a concrete stadium proposal but I won't be holding my breath based on the progress seen to date on the training ground, the big problem with UWE was not owning the freehold but Dwane Sports own the freehold on the proposed training ground and still nothing us happening there (unless I've missed a development). Think along with Swiss I'm one of few that cares about the finances of the club. To LJG for a start I wouldn't be wasting money on that office in London I'm getting bored of you saying that you are the only one that cares about the club finances. It's perfectly possible for people to hold a contrary position to you but to care just as much as you. You don't have to be a miserable sod and slate the owners at every turn to care. I don't feel free to ban me if I'm not allowed to air my views on a public forum.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on May 6, 2018 18:52:27 GMT
I'm getting bored of you saying that you are the only one that cares about the club finances. It's perfectly possible for people to hold a contrary position to you but to care just as much as you. You don't have to be a miserable sod and slate the owners at every turn to care. I don't feel free to ban me if I'm not allowed to air my views on a public forum. Aw, diddums. Where have I even slightly suggested you are not allowed an opinion? I just said I was bored of your miserable ones. Oh and bored of you suggesting that people who are happy with the club don't care about it.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on May 6, 2018 19:25:49 GMT
Did Higgs, Dunford, Jelf and Ware write off debt? Genuine question. LJG, the answer to your question is yes they did. In order to attract Nick Higgs to invest in the club Geoff Dunford and Ron Craig gifted him some of their shares. Nick subsequently put cash in as loans which he would have been entitled to have repaid but he later converted some of the loans to shares and of course those shares were worthless when Dwane Sports took over so that money was lost. Also, the 2016 accounts revealed that the directors who had put money into Rovers via interest bearing loans and bonds wrote off interest of £551,986 to which they were entitled. And as far as I know when Martin Flook and Barry Bradshaw handed Rovers to Geoff and Denis Dunford in 1986 no money changed hands and Martin and Barry wrote off all the cash they had put in during their time at the helm. Your analogy about race horses was a good one and highly relevant to football. This is why I say football is a place for surplus cash you can afford to lose not cash from which you are relying on getting a monetary return. I know this very well because I have put a lot of money into horses and got a lot less money back BUT I have had a hell of a lot of fun out of it. Thank you for the information. OK so next question. You've chucked money away on being a racehorse owner, why are the Al Qadis not allowed to chuck money away on being football club owners? Were your trainer and jockey entitled to ask you for proof of finance and a further show of commitment of capital?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on May 6, 2018 23:42:04 GMT
LJG, the answer to your question is yes they did. In order to attract Nick Higgs to invest in the club Geoff Dunford and Ron Craig gifted him some of their shares. Nick subsequently put cash in as loans which he would have been entitled to have repaid but he later converted some of the loans to shares and of course those shares were worthless when Dwane Sports took over so that money was lost. Also, the 2016 accounts revealed that the directors who had put money into Rovers via interest bearing loans and bonds wrote off interest of £551,986 to which they were entitled. And as far as I know when Martin Flook and Barry Bradshaw handed Rovers to Geoff and Denis Dunford in 1986 no money changed hands and Martin and Barry wrote off all the cash they had put in during their time at the helm. Your analogy about race horses was a good one and highly relevant to football. This is why I say football is a place for surplus cash you can afford to lose not cash from which you are relying on getting a monetary return. I know this very well because I have put a lot of money into horses and got a lot less money back BUT I have had a hell of a lot of fun out of it. Thank you for the information. OK so next question. You've chucked money away on being a racehorse owner, why are the Al Qadis not allowed to chuck money away on being football club owners? Were your trainer and jockey entitled to ask you for proof of finance and a further show of commitment of capital? No, but the rest of my family are entitled to an assurance that the family silver is not at risk due to my desire to take part in such a speculative venture and because of this I use surplus cash which we can afford to lose so my conscience is absolutely clear. You have to make up your own mind whether you think the Al-Qadi family are using surplus cash they can afford to lose.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on May 7, 2018 4:48:56 GMT
Thank you for the information. OK so next question. You've chucked money away on being a racehorse owner, why are the Al Qadis not allowed to chuck money away on being football club owners? Were your trainer and jockey entitled to ask you for proof of finance and a further show of commitment of capital? No, but the rest of my family are entitled to an assurance that the family silver is not at risk due to my desire to take part in such a speculative venture and because of this I use surplus cash which we can afford to lose so my conscience is absolutely clear. You have to make up your own mind whether you think the Al-Qadi family are using surplus cash they can afford to lose. Yes they most certainly are, because as very successful bankers and investment people, they know a sure bet when they see one
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2018 7:02:35 GMT
No, but the rest of my family are entitled to an assurance that the family silver is not at risk due to my desire to take part in such a speculative venture and because of this I use surplus cash which we can afford to lose so my conscience is absolutely clear. You have to make up your own mind whether you think the Al-Qadi family are using surplus cash they can afford to lose. Yes they most certainly are, because as very successful bankers and investment people, they know a sure bet when they see one Are you absolutely sure about that Henbury?
|
|
|
Post by Thatslife on May 7, 2018 12:02:13 GMT
Lot of speculation on here, based on very little, if any, hard facts. In my previous occupation we had a saying that just about sums up the debate on here.
..............."UNKNOWN THINGS HAVEN'T HAPPENED YET".............
|
|