Red Cloud Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 To me this looks a real 50/50 situation. However, should BRFC win they should not expect a nice fat cheque in the post the following day. There will surely be an appeal on some technicality or other and I can see this dragging on for many months - even years. Meanwhile their financial problems can only get worse. Can see the Gash winning but like you say RB, Sainsburys will drag it out for years (which they know full well how crippling this will be), in this case, can see an out of court settlement before the Gash go bust! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV Tom Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Can see the Gash winning but like you say RB, Sainsburys will drag it out for years (which they know full well how crippling this will be), in this case, can see an out of court settlement before the Gash go bust! Why does everyone assume they will go bust? They've averaged more than most teams in the bottom 2 divisions this season, made a good few quid from their televised games and Wembley appearance, got rid of their high wage earners, got a nice sell-on fee for Lambert and have already stated that they will have one of the best player budgets in the basement next season, obviously they have lumbered themselves with the wonga loan but I really struggle to comprehend how they seem to be in such a financial mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Why does everyone assume they will go bust? They've averaged more than most teams in the bottom 2 divisions this season, made a good few quid from their televised games and Wembley appearance, got rid of their high wage earners, got a nice sell-on fee for Lambert and have already stated that they will have one of the best player budgets in the basement next season, obviously they have lumbered themselves with the wonga loan but I really struggle to comprehend how they seem to be in such a financial mess. Because they are making continuous running losses and their crowds do not reach break-even point. They have no Steve Lansdown to absorb the rising debt nor do they have another Lambert to flog (the money's gone from that btw) so the running loss has to be financed by ever more expensive loans. You know how that ends... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Why does everyone assume they will go bust? They've averaged more than most teams in the bottom 2 divisions this season, made a good few quid from their televised games and Wembley appearance, got rid of their high wage earners, got a nice sell-on fee for Lambert and have already stated that they will have one of the best player budgets in the basement next season, obviously they have lumbered themselves with the wonga loan but I really struggle to comprehend how they seem to be in such a financial mess. I don't necessarily follow it would be an immediate consequence, but it doesn't take a leap to see how it could come about very quickly. All you need to think about to consider the actual state of their finances and their credit worthiness, and even lender's assessment of their Sainsburys action, is their existing lender and banker turned down the chance to advance a few million quid. Instead the 15ers settled their Barclays mortgage and instead of refinancing with a conventional lender they had to go to 'wonga' for a few million quid admittedly at high interest rates and high interest rates inspite of them giving security for the stadium and other real estate. Promotion etc may provide breathing space, a reprieve, but that the long term stability of the club may rest on this case is not fan created - it is evidenced by the 15ers very own admission, action and conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV Tom Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I don't necessarily follow it would be an immediate consequence, but it doesn't take a leap to see how it could come about very quickly. All you need to think about to consider the actual state of their finances and their credit worthiness, and even lender's assessment of their Sainsburys action, is their existing lender and banker turned down the chance to advance a few million quid. Instead the 15ers settled their Barclays mortgage and instead of refinancing with a conventional lender they had to go to 'wonga' for a few million quid admittedly at high interest rates and high interest rates inspite of them giving security for the stadium and other real estate. Promotion etc may provide breathing space, a reprieve, but that the long term stability of the club may rest on this case is not fan created - it is evidenced by the 15ers very own admission, action and conduct. Some serious, serious mis-management gone on there, when you think there were teams in our division and the basement going along quite nicely with no financial worries on gates of less than 3000, so where is the money going to come from next season to give them one of the best player budgets in the division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Why does everyone assume they will go bust? They've averaged more than most teams in the bottom 2 divisions this season, made a good few quid from their televised games and Wembley appearance, got rid of their high wage earners, got a nice sell-on fee for Lambert and have already stated that they will have one of the best player budgets in the basement next season, obviously they have lumbered themselves with the wonga loan but I really struggle to comprehend how they seem to be in such a financial mess.because they admitted it that without the sainsburys deal they will be place in administration They are losing a million a season about 7 or 8 million in the red and banks won't lend them money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 With the massive supermarket market going down the pan, and the housing market on on the up again, whoever loses this case could actually come out as the winner. They would end up owning a site which could be redeveloped for housing. This would now make the land worth more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 With the massive supermarket market going down the pan, and the housing market on on the up again, whoever loses this case could actually come out as the winner. They would end up owning a site which could be redeveloped for housing. This would now make the land worth more. Not really because of the gas lose they can't sell because they can't afford the uwe and may not be able to even if they win, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkateee Posted May 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 There plan was to have there stadium build already, with corporate facilities in place, that will make revenue streams for brfc. This money would then offset against any outstanding loans they have. There so desperate for this stadium, so that the football can survive. The debt of brfc, is to nick higgs, and the other directors. If they decide to call that debt in after failing to get the stadium, the club would go into administration, and the mem sold to pay higgs and Co back. They simply don't have the clout like are owner, and would look to call it a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV Tom Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I still don't get it, they had a higher average than 14 teams in our division last season and only 3 teams in the basement had better crowds, yet no other team seems to be in such a financial mess that they have to run to Wonga, as I stated, some serious, serious mis-management has gone on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 With the massive supermarket market going down the pan, and the housing market on on the up again, whoever loses this case could actually come out as the winner. They would end up owning a site which could be redeveloped for housing. This would now make the land worth more. Sainsburys were paying a hugely inflated price for the land, housing wouldn't generate as much money. They'd be homeless and have nowhere near enough money in the bank to build anything if they sold to a housing developer, perhaps they'd have enough to pay the directors back and hope someone else comes in to help.....maybe an oil rich Saudi prince?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I still don't get it, they had a higher average than 14 teams in our division last season and only 3 teams in the basement had better crowds, yet no other team seems to be in such a financial mess that they have to run to Wonga, as I stated, some serious, serious mis-management has gone on theor turnover doesn't cover their wages so the lose money it's that simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV Tom Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 theor turnover doesn't cover their wages so the lose money it's that simple As i said, serious, serious mis-management, it's not as if they have splashed out any money on transfers, their attendances and all those years of rugby income should of entitled them to pay higher than average wages for the division they were in, who were all these players that earned such great money to put them on the brink of administration and who were the clowns that sanctioned it? It's always been the same with Rovers, always pleading poverty, always wanting something for nothing and always dodgy dealings behind the scenes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkateee Posted May 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I think i didn't word myself very well cynic, but thanks for putting me straight on the details. Obviously the directors are owed money, but yes i totally agree with you, as not to forget the wonga lone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 As i said, serious, serious mis-management, it's not as if they have splashed out any money on transfers, their attendances and all those years of rugby income should of entitled them to pay higher than average wages for the division they were in, who were all these players that earned such great money to put them on the brink of administration and who were the clowns that sanctioned it? It's always been the same with Rovers, always pleading poverty, always wanting something for nothing and always dodgy dealings behind the scenes Rovers don't make money just like 65 of the 72 clubs in the football league, Mismanagement is just consigned to rovers but to the majority of football clubs this one included, We are just lucky we have a billionaire owner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manon Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 If the judge goes for full contract performance, which seems unlikely, can she not refuse the right for appeals, considering the implications of the timeframe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwwtk Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I'm not sure Sainsburys would have their legal rights denied them just because the gas are in a hurry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo88 Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 The issue with Rovers' Wonga loan is that it must be repaid in full by the end of the year. All they can currently afford to pay is monthly interest. If they don't get some big dosh in the next few months they have a big problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I'm not sure Sainsburys would have their legal rights denied them just because the gas are in a hurry? I have a vague memory that not appealing was a pre requisite of getting this case to court, I am sure one of our legal eagles will be able to confirm that one way or the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Unless somebody is a shareholder or is related to the ownership of Rovers it is frankly laughable that people can come out and say they are making a loss or making a profit. To the best of my knowledge they are not listed on any bourse anywhere in the world which means they are a private limited company, partnership or sole proprietorship and, as such, any accounts that may need to be submitted to Companies House can be abbreviated. And let me just add that abbreviated accounts really tell us nothing; a small profit can easily and legally be turned into a small loss and vice versa. Further, whether they make a loss or not is irrelevant; they may continue to function as an entity due to the largesse or loan of shareholders or outside inputs. So lets take emotion out of this argument for a moment and simply be frank and honest.. nobody knows if they are doing well or bad and either way they can still function as a business until such time as the owners withdraw their support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tall King Blox Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Maybe this store might buy the Mem ?...kinda poetic me thinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 If the judge goes for full contract performance, which seems unlikely, can she not refuse the right for appeals, considering the implications of the timeframe? I would imagine so, otherwise Sainsburys could just carry on appealing until Higgs buggers off to Tuscany for good. Still, it looks almost as if the board at BRFC has 'bet the farm' on this... I did just have a look on the Slagchat forum to gauge their thoughts on this but I found that in the most recent posts they're discussing the merits of Krispy Kreme doughnuts and peoples favourite cookies so I thought I'd save myself the bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Unless somebody is a shareholder or is related to the ownership of Rovers it is frankly laughable that people can come out and say they are making a loss or making a profit. To the best of my knowledge they are not listed on any bourse anywhere in the world which means they are a private limited company, partnership or sole proprietorship and, as such, any accounts that may need to be submitted to Companies House can be abbreviated. And let me just add that abbreviated accounts really tell us nothing; a small profit can easily and legally be turned into a small loss and vice versa. Further, whether they make a loss or not is irrelevant; they may continue to function as an entity due to the largesse or loan of shareholders or outside inputs. So lets take emotion out of this argument for a moment and simply be frank and honest.. nobody knows if they are doing well or bad and either way they can still function as a business until such time as the owners withdraw their support. The fact that they have said it them selfs in court must of missed you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I would imagine so, otherwise Sainsburys could just carry on appealing until Higgs buggers off to Tuscany for good. Still, it looks almost as if the board at BRFC has 'bet the farm' on this... I did just have a look on the Slagchat forum to gauge their thoughts on this but I found that in the most recent posts they're discussing the merits of Krispy Kreme doughnuts and peoples favourite cookies so I thought I'd save myself the bother. Well, for the record, I tried one of them once and thought they were totally overloaded with sugar and really overpriced. The Gas fans, at least, seem to have money to burn then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Well, for the record, I tried one of them once and thought they were totally overloaded with sugar and really overpriced. The Gas fans, at least, seem to have money to burn then! This discussion could be going on in Court today. The case is more complicated than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 This discussion could be going on in Court today. The case is more complicated than I thought. is there a Dunkin rep in that court room? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinmans Love Child Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 The gas guzzler mob are still on about boycotting Sainsburys, if 30k of us (!) didn't shop in Sainsburys, they'd feel it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.