Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Bristol Rovers Dustbin Thread


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Maesknoll Red said:

That must have been like getting to a cup final for him, a few successful stadium executives there, they must have been mightily impressed with the tales of a ramshackle club and its failures.  I wonder if the networking got him any funding?

I doubt funding will have been secured at such an event, however I hear that Wally was mighty impressed at the wonder of the on-site vending machine and will be looking into the pheasability of providing “in date” snacks & refreshments, as part of their stadium revamp in the summer. 

Good times are on the horizon. 

“Unlucky the shit!”

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, In the Net said:

"Resolution of allotment of securities"  - this document has been filed at Companies House, but is not yet available to view. Can any of the accountancy experts on here please explain what this may entail?

They're thinking about allowing people to grow carrots and cabbages on the Memorial Stadium 'pitch' and are worried that someone might break in.

Edited by Calculus
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, In the Net said:

"Resolution of allotment of securities"  - this document has been filed at Companies House, but is not yet available to view. Can any of the accountancy experts on here please explain what this may entail?

 

4 minutes ago, Calculus said:

They're thinking about allowing people to grow carrots and cabbages on the Memorial Stadium 'pitch' and were worried that someone might break in.

I think you should be talking in the past tense there calculus - as they word resolution in ITN's original post implies it was resolved :P

I am guessing to resolve the security around the "mem allotments" they must have put up a fence - the relevant question is, has it been paid for yet? 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, steviestevieneville said:

The reason we mock them is because of the lies they tell constantly about the numbers they take away and bang on about a amazing away support they supposedly have which in reality is bollocks. Most of us know our away support is average but don’t feel the need to embellish it because of a inferiority complex . 

Cant argue with that! They do love to tell porkie pies

Another thing I had to laugh at was one Gashead in my work, who the other day said me proud that next seasons they had season 'cards' and not books of tickets

I think we got rid of books at the turn of the century!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andy082005 said:

Cant argue with that! They do love to tell porkie pies

Another thing I had to laugh at was one Gashead in my work, who the other day said me proud that next seasons they had season 'cards' and not books of tickets

I think we got rid of books at the turn of the century!

About 17 years ago..? Why does that ring a bell..?! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, In the Net said:

"Resolution of allotment of securities"  - this document has been filed at Companies House, but is not yet available to view. Can any of the accountancy experts on here please explain what this may entail?

 

My old mucker Ronnie Moules advises that this is a formality which allows shares to be allocated in respect of funding provided by the much loved and well regarded Bristol Rovers Share Scheme. Initially launched in 2002 when Rovers were losing  £20,000  per week the objectives of the scheme have changed since the club has successfully managed to increase that figure to 40,000 per week. Now it provides an opportunity for pensioners and low income families to sacrifice upwards of £2.50 per week in order to feed and water the Al-Qadi string of  Dromedaries. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, In the Net said:

"Resolution of allotment of securities"  - this document has been filed at Companies House, but is not yet available to view. Can any of the accountancy experts on here please explain what this may entail?

 

11 minutes ago, bert tann said:

 

My old mucker Ronnie Moules advises that this is a formality which allows shares to be allocated in respect of funding provided by the much loved and well regarded Bristol Rovers Share Scheme. Initially launched in 2002 when Rovers were losing  £20,000  per week the objectives of the scheme have changed since the club has successfully managed to increase that figure to 40,000 per week. Now it provides an opportunity for pensioners and low income families to sacrifice upwards of £2.50 per week in order to feed and water the Al-Qadi string of  Dromedaries. 

Well possibly Bert!

Usually it is used, as it has been by Steve Lansdown at City, to "disapply pre-emption rights".

The standard procedure for a new share issue is to offer it to existing shareholders in proportion to their existing shareholding.

What this does is allow a block of shares to be issued to an existing shareholder (or possibly new, not sure) without offering any to the rest.

Steve uses it as a convenient way of putting new money into the club to pay off debts (due to himself!).

It is possible that this is also what the Al-Qs intend, if so that is good news for Rovers as that is money in that isn't debt so doesn't need to be paid back.

Or it could be for an issue to a new investor.

Or it could be what Bert said.

 

Good news rather than bad for Rovers IMHO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Well possibly Bert!

Usually it is used, as it has been by Steve Lansdown at City, to "disapply pre-emption rights".

The standard procedure for a new share issue is to offer it to existing shareholders in proportion to their existing shareholding.

What this does is allow a block of shares to be issued to an existing shareholder (or possibly new, not sure) without offering any to the rest.

Steve uses it as a convenient way of putting new money into the club to pay off debts (due to himself!).

It is possible that this is also what the Al-Qs intend, if so that is good news for Rovers as that is money in that isn't debt so doesn't need to be paid back.

Or it could be for an issue to a new investor.

Or it could be what Bert said.

 

Good news rather than bad for Rovers IMHO.

..Which is what Sir Steve has done again today. To the tune of £15m.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ska Junkie said:

Is our £15m to cover debts?  If not, any ideas what it's for?

It can't be the houses ad that would be Bristok sport rather than BCFC wouldn't it?

Free transport to away matches..?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Is our £15m to cover debts?  If not, any ideas what it's for?

It can't be the houses as  that would be Bristol sport rather than BCFC wouldn't it?

I think it’s serious addition of working capital as well as covering any new debt in the current year. How much is the new training facility costing?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, finally gone through the accounts.  Apologies if repeating previous posts.

Loss for year: £3m less £0.9m write off of all the UWE stuff = £2.1m of which £0.3m interest.

Closing debt (note 23) £8.6m up from £7.2m.  Lots of other creditors up which will unwind into the debt when paid off.

The facility Dwane Sports has provided was £10m, secured against the ground, but this is now raised to £15m.

This is all at 30 June 2017.

So roll it forward to the edn of this season; another loss of £2.1m so debt at 30 June 2018 is £10.7m of which only £10m is secured (tallies with the out of secured money by March which we thought).

The raising of the RCF to £15m suggests the owners will now fund, at risk as there's no further security, two more seasons taking the debt to £15m of which they are £5m at risk.

The pre-emption rights waiver suggests that there will also be capital injections which is effectvely money written off.

So it looks like they are risking another £5m to fund the next two seasons.  I struggle to see the point of that if they intend to sell (far better just to sell now) so it's watch this space.  I can understand why Sir Steve funds City because he has a vision for the club and Bristol sport in general.  Why they wish to set fire to £5m does escape me.

  • Thanks 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said:

Why does everyone refer to him as Sir Steve.  He hasn't bought his knighthood yet, has he?

because of what he's done to the club, ie funded a new ground and bankrolled us since 2003/04

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

Loss for year: £3m less £0.9m write off of all the UWE stuff = £2.1m of which £0.3m interest.

Closing debt (note 23) £8.6m up from £7.2m.  Lots of other creditors up which will unwind into the debt when paid off.

Their losses in the last two years will I guess have been slightly improved due to the sales of Bodin and Taylor. To achieve a similar level of loss in the current year presumably they'll need to sell for a similar fee Harrison or well, a tent? Failure to sell will further weaken their financial position?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rudolf Hucker said:

Their losses in the last two years will I guess have been slightly improved due to the sales of Bodin and Taylor. To achieve a similar level of loss in the current year presumably they'll need to sell for a similar fee Harrison or well, a tent? Failure to sell will further weaken their financial position?

How much did their sprinklers cost..? Oh and don’t forget that lovely new pitch of theirs..! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

Okay, finally gone through the accounts.  Apologies if repeating previous posts.

Loss for year: £3m less £0.9m write off of all the UWE stuff = £2.1m of which £0.3m interest.

Closing debt (note 23) £8.6m up from £7.2m.  Lots of other creditors up which will unwind into the debt when paid off.

The facility Dwane Sports has provided was £10m, secured against the ground, but this is now raised to £15m.

This is all at 30 June 2017.

So roll it forward to the edn of this season; another loss of £2.1m so debt at 30 June 2018 is £10.7m of which only £10m is secured (tallies with the out of secured money by March which we thought).

The raising of the RCF to £15m suggests the owners will now fund, at risk as there's no further security, two more seasons taking the debt to £15m of which they are £5m at risk.

The pre-emption rights waiver suggests that there will also be capital injections which is effectvely money written off.

So it looks like they are risking another £5m to fund the next two seasons.  I struggle to see the point of that if they intend to sell (far better just to sell now) so it's watch this space.  I can understand why Sir Steve funds City because he has a vision for the club and Bristol sport in general.  Why they wish to set fire to £5m does escape me.

Would there be real benefit in extending the facility to be a proportionately large creditor in order to have greater control on any admin/insolvency process? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 29AR said:

Would there be real benefit in extending the facility to be a proportionately large creditor in order to have greater control on any admin/insolvency process? 

Yes you'd get more of a vote when it comes to a voting on a creditors' arrangement but by that point you'd be another £5m down so that would be an unusual way to look at it.

All that I can think is that they have a plan to get a new ground or substantially improve the current one and they think that this will then substantially improve the selling price of the club so they will get their money back with profit that way.

I suppose it's possible - spend a few quid get a shiny new stadium and promotion to the championship and then try to sell for £20m - £30m and recoup their debt with a small profit.

At £2m annual operating loss before spending anything on the new or renovated ground it all seems wildly optimistic to me.

Still, the can has been kicked down the road for two years so the excitement's over. For now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

Okay, finally gone through the accounts.  Apologies if repeating previous posts.

Loss for year: £3m less £0.9m write off of all the UWE stuff = £2.1m of which £0.3m interest.

Closing debt (note 23) £8.6m up from £7.2m.  Lots of other creditors up which will unwind into the debt when paid off.

The facility Dwane Sports has provided was £10m, secured against the ground, but this is now raised to £15m.

This is all at 30 June 2017.

So roll it forward to the edn of this season; another loss of £2.1m so debt at 30 June 2018 is £10.7m of which only £10m is secured (tallies with the out of secured money by March which we thought).

The raising of the RCF to £15m suggests the owners will now fund, at risk as there's no further security, two more seasons taking the debt to £15m of which they are £5m at risk.

The pre-emption rights waiver suggests that there will also be capital injections which is effectvely money written off.

So it looks like they are risking another £5m to fund the next two seasons.  I struggle to see the point of that if they intend to sell (far better just to sell now) so it's watch this space.  I can understand why Sir Steve funds City because he has a vision for the club and Bristol sport in general.  Why they wish to set fire to £5m does escape me.

Could the extra £5m be secured against other property? I haven't had the chance to go through it all myself but wonder if the Colony has been used (although I originally thought Dwayne Sports purchased that not BRFC). If it is £15m against the Mem that looks absurd given Sainsbury's pulled out of their proposed £12m purchase because it was no longer affordable - not sure who could value that land with an extra 25% on top. 

Am I also right in thinking that the interest is being paid to the owners/Dwayne Sport so the owners are taking £0.3m out each year plus any salaries/dividends for directors/shareholders. I wonder if the £5m could be the approximate value of the funds they would have taken out of the club by the end of the next two years, in which case there isn't much of a risk: £5m in payments (over several years) and £10 secured on the Mem. 

Would appreciate your thoughts on the above as you clearly have a better grasp of this than I do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...