pirate
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 223
|
Post by pirate on Sept 3, 2014 21:07:41 GMT
Sheed. Nothing to see here.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 21:35:08 GMT
Seems very sensible to me, get the gigantic chips of our under performing shoulders we may just get somewhere better than where we've ended up How long can we put up with year after year, season after season of piss poor performance, more interested in whether City are having a bad time than our own success or lack of. Non League Bristol Rovers, as far as I'm concerned I want to get back into the FL not spend my life pretending we are getting a new 22000 seat stadium, need a new 22000 seat stadium or that what happens at Ashton Gate is important to us. Administration stares us in the face, anyone who can't see that is a deluded fool, personally I'll take any route out of that nightmare, from which we might not emerge.
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 4, 2014 16:07:57 GMT
Contrary to some views on here, I am not a shed or a troll. I'm just another gashead trying to think of ways out of our current prediciment, and I'm always interested in seeing the few positives of our current position. The big benefit is that there are now things that can be done that were impossible 12 months ago. A beneficial relationship with City is one of them, and whilst rivalry is all well and good, I'm not happy to see Rovers fail so long as City aren't all that successful. If we can help eachother it's for the good of both clubs and suggestions that any co-operation will lead to a merger or an SL takeover / breakdown of Rovers are hugely speculative to put it very mildly.
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 4, 2014 16:20:55 GMT
Contrary to some views on here, I am not a shed or a troll. I'm just another gashead trying to think of ways out of our current prediciment, and I'm always interested in seeing the few positives of our current position. The big benefit is that there are now things that can be done that were impossible 12 months ago. A beneficial relationship with City is one of them, and whilst rivalry is all well and good, I'm not happy to see Rovers fail so long as City aren't all that successful. If we can help eachother it's for the good of both clubs and suggestions that any co-operation will lead to a merger or an SL takeover / breakdown of Rovers are hugely speculative to put it very mildly. Still fishing then?
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 4, 2014 16:32:27 GMT
Contrary to some views on here, I am not a shed or a troll. I'm just another gashead trying to think of ways out of our current prediciment, and I'm always interested in seeing the few positives of our current position. The big benefit is that there are now things that can be done that were impossible 12 months ago. A beneficial relationship with City is one of them, and whilst rivalry is all well and good, I'm not happy to see Rovers fail so long as City aren't all that successful. If we can help eachother it's for the good of both clubs and suggestions that any co-operation will lead to a merger or an SL takeover / breakdown of Rovers are hugely speculative to put it very mildly. Still fishing then? People are still ignoring what they don't like if that's what you mean.
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Sept 4, 2014 17:08:42 GMT
People are still ignoring what they don't like if that's what you mean. Assuming that you are a genuine supporter of BRFC timothy, then I suggest that you go back to the drawing board and re-evaluate your thinking. BETTER DEAD THAN RED.
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 4, 2014 17:10:54 GMT
People are still ignoring what they don't like if that's what you mean. Assuming that you are a genuine supporter of BRFC timothy, then I suggest that you go back to the drawing board and re-evaluate your thinking. BETTER DEAD THAN RED. As a true BRFC supporter I'm concerned we might actually be presented with that choice.
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 4, 2014 17:19:20 GMT
And in any event, no one is asking you be 'red'.
I'm suggesting we act in a feeder capacity to the club down the road who two divisions above us, and this could include the possibility of using their stadium if our financial situation finally catches up with us. There is no logical threat of us becoming red, and the instance of treating city as our current rivals is an attitude that risks the future of the club...seriously, where are your priorities?
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Sept 4, 2014 17:28:01 GMT
Assuming that you are a genuine supporter of BRFC timothy, then I suggest that you go back to the drawing board and re-evaluate your thinking. BETTER DEAD THAN RED. As a true BRFC supporter I'm concerned we might actually be presented with that choice. Keep the faith, tim. Remember, when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Frankly I find the argument that you put forward to be ludicrous to any genuine Rovers supporter. The situation may be bad at present, but it ain't that bad surely? I think that your original thought . . . . . . might be correct. Keep the faith.
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 4, 2014 17:34:53 GMT
Whether the first guy was a troll or not isn't really relevant to now is it? We're operating at a loss and have been for a number of years, the only thing that is keeping is solvent is the financial support by the BoD, and we're yet to experience the fall out from the Sainsbury's debacle. Eventually the directors are consider the only way of them recovering any of their loans and take us into administration, we can wait until that day happens or we can take proactive steps to avoid disaster. Or we can just scream that the directors should invest more money / write off the existing loans or pray for a Sainsbury's miracle.
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Sept 4, 2014 17:44:57 GMT
Whether the first guy was a troll or not isn't really relevant to now is it? We're operating at a loss and have been for a number of years, the only thing that is keeping is solvent is the financial support by the BoD, and we're yet to experience the fall out from the Sainsbury's debacle. Eventually the directors are consider the only way of them recovering any of their loans and take us into administration, we can wait until that day happens or we can take proactive steps to avoid disaster. Or we can just scream that the directors should invest more money / write off the existing loans or pray for a Sainsbury's miracle. My word, you've really bought into all of this haven't you?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Sept 4, 2014 17:57:26 GMT
Whether the first guy was a troll or not isn't really relevant to now is it? We're operating at a loss and have been for a number of years, the only thing that is keeping is solvent is the financial support by the BoD, and we're yet to experience the fall out from the Sainsbury's debacle. Eventually the directors are consider the only way of them recovering any of their loans and take us into administration, we can wait until that day happens or we can take proactive steps to avoid disaster. Or we can just scream that the directors should invest more money / write off the existing loans or pray for a Sainsbury's miracle. If the season ticket income and initial Lambert money has been spent what sort of cash flow loss are we looking at ? Running costs say 3 million per year equals around 57 000 per week Less income from say 2500 paying customers at 20 spend each every fortnight which is around 25 000 per week Cash flow loss per week is 32 000 In the past someone may have said they would finance this weekly and be reimbursed from next seasons big cash inflow from season ticket sales, league payments, sponsorship etc But what if no one is willing to do that now ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2014 18:27:05 GMT
And in any event, no one is asking you be 'red'. I'm suggesting we act in a feeder capacity to the club down the road who two divisions above us, and this could include the possibility of using their stadium if our financial situation finally catches up with us. There is no logical threat of us becoming red, and the instance of treating city as our current rivals is an attitude that risks the future of the club...seriously, where are your priorities? Where is the Rugger buggers going to play,can not see three teams using Trashton Lets just win promotion,stuff the Red side
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 4, 2014 18:28:32 GMT
If no one is doing that now then we're insolvent. Last year we made a loss of 876,270, the year before 407,969, the year before that 1,267,207 and so on, and so on. Given that there is a major loss every year it is difficult to put this down to a non-linear cash flow and assume that creditors were able to get their money back when a big lump comes in at the start of the season, and it's more likely that the BoD were supporting the club in the expectation that a promotion to league 1, a new stadium and return to profit would see them reimbursed, and, although this won't be popular, an amount of money must have been left in the club out of the goodness of their heart in the hope they can advance or save the club.
As you rightly suggest Swiss, people may not be willing to continue with that level of long term continuous support, especially if there is no prospect of a pot of golf at the end of the journey. Given that no one here is willing to accept radical ways to avoid administration, they might instead give some thought to what comes next.
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Sept 4, 2014 23:12:01 GMT
Whilst there are no formally acknowledged feeder clubs in the English football pyramid, the increasing financial difference between the haves and the have nots suggests that feeder clubs may well be one of the only viable financial mechanisms for lower league clubs to survive. Faced with the half-baked ideas of Greg Dyke to place reserve teams into the league, becoming feeder clubs to nurture young British talent could have a number of benefits. Overall quality of football will improve and the biggest drain on resources (i.e. player wages) can be subsidised by the parent club. Issues of what to do when teams are promoted into the same league as the parent club would have to be resolved, but overall there could be many positive aspects.
So I would ask of the original poster, when do City become Cardiff's feeder club?
.......Feeder for City?..f off.
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 5, 2014 7:50:56 GMT
Whilst there are no formally acknowledged feeder clubs in the English football pyramid, the increasing financial difference between the haves and the have nots suggests that feeder clubs may well be one of the only viable financial mechanisms for lower league clubs to survive. Faced with the half-baked ideas of Greg Dyke to place reserve teams into the league, becoming feeder clubs to nurture young British talent could have a number of benefits. Overall quality of football will improve and the biggest drain on resources (i.e. player wages) can be subsidised by the parent club. Issues of what to do when teams are promoted into the same league as the parent club would have to be resolved, but overall there could be many positive aspects. So I would ask of the original poster, when do City become Cardiff's feeder club? .......Feeder for City?..f off. Difference between City and Cardiff is currently one league, city are the bookies favourites for promotion and they've a billionaire owner who happily clears 8 figure sums of debt. They've got a decent academy which they can afford to spend money on, and although Cardiff also have a decent academy, they're recent stint in the premier league does not mean they've magically got premiership standard resources and youth prospects, they haven't, perhaps after a few more years of development and another promotion it would make perfect sense for City and Cardiff to have some sort of relationship. Meanwhile, any FL standard prospect would already by a first team player for us, so spending money on developing youth players is pretty much redundant, our owners vision for the club might not extend beyond the now doomed UWE stadium and many gasheads are unsure he will continue to support the club if he can recover some of his assets through an administration and our current form in the new league suggests we may need a season or two to develop our game to this level before we achieve automatic promotion (leaving us to rely on the playoffs at best). City have players in their youth team who would do a job for us, cost us diddly, gain a good development opportunity whilst allowing the city staff to keep a close eye on them. It would make a huge difference to the club and ease the burden on our wage bill, only stubbornness could cause people to reject the idea out of hand.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2014 8:11:52 GMT
To be honest if the worse case scenario came about and administration / bankruptcy whatever happened,as long as the club came out of it with enough money to buy a small ground,I would rather start again as AFC Rovers of Bristol at the bottom of the pyramid than be Citys feeder club. I don't say that lightly,its not stubbornness or a knee jerk reaction,whatever you say as a feeder club we WOULD lose our identity,I have mentioned Real Castilla whenever their name is mentioned it is qualified by saying "they are Real Madrids 2nd team",why would it be different for Rovers ?.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2014 8:11:59 GMT
Agree with the original Op or not, the subject of financial stability cannot be ignored. At least someone is talking about it.
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 5, 2014 8:50:36 GMT
To be honest if the worse case scenario came about and administration / bankruptcy whatever happened,as long as the club came out of it with enough money to buy a small ground,I would rather start again as AFC Rovers of Bristol at the bottom of the pyramid than be Citys feeder club. I don't say that lightly,its not stubbornness or a knee jerk reaction,whatever you say as a feeder club we WOULD lose our identity,I have mentioned Real Castilla whenever their name is mentioned it is qualified by saying "they are Real Madrids 2nd team",why would it be different for Rovers ?. Lately I've almost been hoping this would happen - seems far preferable to our current predicament.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2014 9:26:38 GMT
I will say two words which will lead to there being only ONE team in Bristol if what you are suggesting happens..Steve Lansdown! Surely any Rovers supporter can see that? Surely it would be some sort of conflict of interest for SL to own 2 clubs? I don't suppose you've considered that there being 2 clubs in Bristol actually benefit Rovers and City if they work together to get the best out of their resources. Frankly, a refusal to look at the benefits of co-operation smacks of a mentality where we'd accept a poor Rovers as long as it came with a poor City and this cannot be a sensible attitude in our current position. You just cant see it can you? Any kind of `partnership` with city would only be the beginning of the end. Their would be no conflict of interest from Lansdown as he would only own one club in Bristol in the end. City,and you cant see that? Lansdown would only be interested in a deal with Rovers to defunct them and have Bristol a one team City. Anyway,you have a first class seat reserved on the 11 hundred hours Crazytrain express to nowhere so get a move on
|
|