Told this at footy this morning,,

Looked it up on here just got back now and it does not look good,,a statement out of Ewood says it is just a matter of course and wll easilly be dealt with by the owners,,but no smoke as they say,,Pompey all over again here i reckon...bye bye blues..ffs..


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2072607/Nick-Harris-Blackburn-fear-players-wont-paid-bankers-demand-10m-deposit.html?ITO=1490

IF it happens you wont be the last team it happens to.....

FrenchSpur wrote:IF it happens you wont be the last team it happens to.....

Of course frenchie,, we were talking in the changing rooms about it and we have come with this conclusion,which i will run pass you,,ok,, we think that the bank can see into the future..lol..Yes Venkys have got us languishing with a mere debt of 6mln and that is good not a bad position,,but obviously they are talking of strenthening the side this Jan,,which would indeed increase that 6mln,,the banks have advised not to sell there top players because that would send out the wrong signals,,so why have the banks done this?,,well we think it is all about the Venky insistence on keeping on board a failing manager and our league position because of that,the may well ask,which other corperate would keep in charge, nay increase his pay to a manager with such poor returns,,not many Frenchie i would say,,so what the banks are saying to Venkys is this,,get your act together on your manager or your down ,and if you go down we are all in trouble,we think its that, the banks making sure there is no risk to them,it is all about confidence,and this manger doesnt give the bank confidence,for me well done the banks..what do you think on that ?

I dont think banks are particularly good at knowing how football clubs are run. Normally they will lend money against guarantees or the ground or the gate receipts. So if a bank is not lending money to the club then it doest see how it is going to get its money repaid.

So I would guess the Venkys are not supplying the right guarantees to the bank and there cant be much in the pot at the moment with gate receipts or the ground.

The bank will also look at the possible future revenue which (being realistic with your league position) is not high...

SO I would suggest that the Venkys are a bit short of cash

Very strange. Blackburn aren't exactly lavish spenders and must have had a fairly decent income with steady gates and a few seasons of mid-table finishs.

Ezekiel 25:17 wrote:Very strange. Blackburn aren't exactly lavish spenders and must have had a fairly decent income with steady gates and a few seasons of mid-table finishs.

Well you dont know how much they take out of the business.... They could have asset stripped it.....

Think Man Ure where the Galzers managed to buy the company with money borrowed against the company... There are all sorts of financial plays out there most of which seem to be illogical..

FrenchSpur wrote:

Ezekiel 25:17 wrote:Very strange. Blackburn aren't exactly lavish spenders and must have had a fairly decent income with steady gates and a few seasons of mid-table finishs.

Well you dont know how much they take out of the business.... They could have asset stripped it.....

Think Man Ure where the Galzers managed to buy the company with money borrowed against the company... There are all sorts of financial plays out there most of which seem to be illogical..

There is nothing logical about any of all this,why for instance did they buy the club in the first place?no idea about football obviously not aware of the amount of cash involved,,looking for making a name for there company,,well thats back fired because they are just total luaghing stocks to the footballing world...no the only thing i hope is that they do sell us off to some one else,

Trig wrote:

FrenchSpur wrote:

Ezekiel 25:17 wrote:Very strange. Blackburn aren't exactly lavish spenders and must have had a fairly decent income with steady gates and a few seasons of mid-table finishs.

Well you dont know how much they take out of the business.... They could have asset stripped it.....

Think Man Ure where the Galzers managed to buy the company with money borrowed against the company... There are all sorts of financial plays out there most of which seem to be illogical..

There is nothing logical about any of all this,why for instance did they buy the club in the first place?no idea about football obviously not aware of the amount of cash involved,,looking for making a name for there company,,well thats back fired because they are just total luaghing stocks to the footballing world...no the only thing i hope is that they do sell us off to some one else,

Football is really only a business when you are a big club... Even then you can get silly like Man City and Chelsea... IF you are a small club then its a vanity thing as you have to fund players and wages if you want to compete

It's not strange at all. What the bank is saying is that they doubt Venkys ability to support their debt. Something similar is about to happen to Birmingham. (the club, not the city.) It's probably because of your league position.

FrenchSpur wrote:

Trig wrote:

FrenchSpur wrote:

Ezekiel 25:17 wrote:Very strange. Blackburn aren't exactly lavish spenders and must have had a fairly decent income with steady gates and a few seasons of mid-table finishs.

Well you dont know how much they take out of the business.... They could have asset stripped it.....

Think Man Ure where the Galzers managed to buy the company with money borrowed against the company... There are all sorts of financial plays out there most of which seem to be illogical..

There is nothing logical about any of all this,why for instance did they buy the club in the first place?no idea about football obviously not aware of the amount of cash involved,,looking for making a name for there company,,well thats back fired because they are just total luaghing stocks to the footballing world...no the only thing i hope is that they do sell us off to some one else,

Football is really only a business when you are a big club... Even then you can get silly like Man City and Chelsea... IF you are a small club then its a vanity thing as you have to fund players and wages if you want to compete

Ya i am getting the impression that they thought that the club would be self financing,but surely they did there market research,,who knows without a benefactor very few clubs in the prem would ever survive on there own efforts and i mean a very few,we will just have to wait and see ,again we were very unlucky today but i did predict that one,,lol

Trig, I only saw the second half of your game today, but thought the tactics were a disgrace, right out of the Mcleish book of football. You rarely got out of your own half and it was just letting Sunderland back into it.

villanfromluton wrote:Trig, I only saw the second half of your game today, but thought the tactics were a disgrace, right out of the Mcleish book of football. You rarely got out of your own half and it was just letting Sunderland back into it.

He cant make his mind up to be honest,,it must be driving the players mad,,usually he goes looking formore goals when even if we are winning but yep,yesterday he came out in the second half and what a disaister that was,but in truth again i cant be too hard on him,as we had a perfectly good goal ruled out and got beat by a set piece that i thought our keeper could have done better,no keeper should be getting beat at his near post,,but still i do see what you are seeing , can you now see though our frustrations,,there is allways a legit reason for us getting fecking beat..lol..

Trig, didnt see the disallowed goal, but heard on radio should have stood. Thought the tactics were too negative though. As for the free kick, have to say I couldnt blame Robinson, was just a superb effort from Larson