ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

[aggi]

I don't have time to re-read all the posts, but didn't someone say (maybe a newspaper report?) that the Egyptian bid would allow MG a continuing role, and the US bid not? Might that explain why the Egyptian bid might be preferred by our major shareholder?

I suspect this was a case of putting a few speculative posts together and getting another speculative post.

I would guess (and it's entirely a guess) that the earlier reference was to Flood staying on and someone took it to mean Garlick.

[Chester Perry]

I still expect our Chairman and board to do WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS right by the club they support.

probably a more accurate perspective - it doesn't mean it is what we think is right by the club - but does mean that their intentions are sound which is all we can hope for and is consistent with what we have seen during their tenure

[Somethingfishy]

We have posters posturing about mere speculation and speculating about others speculating. I'd be willing to speculate that all this speculation is just that..mere speculation and all the posturing is posters being over spectacular with their speculating.

[Hipper]

If you come down stairs in the middle of the night and find a guy dressed all in black brandishing a knife and he tells you he was confused and accidentally entered the wrong house would you believe him and go straight back to bed trusting him the let himself out and lock up or would you expect he was trying to rob your house and call the police?

If it looks like a cow, smells like a cow and moo's like a cow, chances are it's a cow. Why are you so eager to give this guy with a murky history a chance?

It's almost like some people have an ulterior motive to their comments.

I like cows:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCdWOMm0a-o

[TsarBomba]

On the issue of a ground redevelopment versus move, the ideal solution would be to stay where we are. The town would be devastated if money normally spent locally would be diverted to some out of town retail park.

But then it may just not be financially viable to redevelop the Turf. We all know of the serious problems and delays with the corner stands, and the purported ballooning of costs involved.

On a side note has anyone seen an image of the new national stadium in Albania? €85M cost, 22.k capacity, hotel, shopping mall, underground car park, learning facilities. It looks fantastic.

ALK or El Kashashy, who have no emotional ties to the Turf, may well see this as a preferred option, certainly from a business case.

[NottsClaret]

Fair points TsarBomba, I'm of the same view. To be honest, I'm pretty sceptical of any take over talk, generally speaking once you hear about a deal in the media then it's probably not happening.

But let's say it did happen, and even more unlikely, they actually wanted to invest / chuck money away and relocate. It makes perfect sense. None of the complications and hassle or redeveloping a cramped existing site. It'd probably pull more fans in. But that'd be it for me going regularly.

I'd maybe go to the odd match but this break has made me realise I'm not that fussed about Burnley playing football. It's as much about the nostalgia, familiarity and tradition of the club, the ground, the pubs and people. Going to watch in a bowl next to a motorway, like Horwich Wanderers, and we'll just be another Reading.

But I totally get a football club doesn't exist to pander to one fan's minority view so it feels inevitable at some point, just hope not for a while yet.

[TsarBomba]

I don’t doubt there’ll be a lot of regulars who will think the same as you should we relocate.

But I too think it’s inevitable at some point.

I do wonder how much money we have spent ‘titivating’ the Turf in the past decade. Certainly in the tens of millions, which from a long term perspective, makes little sense.

[Wokingclaret]

I don’t doubt there’ll be a lot of regulars who will think the same as you should we relocate.

But I too think it’s inevitable at some point.

I do wonder how much money we have spent ‘titivating’ the Turf in the past decade. Certainly in the tens of millions, which from a long term perspective, makes little sense.

I hope not, but the Turf is a mess, stands out of alignment, not much room to play with at the CFS. Also the capacity would be much reduced if a stand is taken down to redev. That said its possible in the championship

[Woodleyclaret]

Our present board have realised we need a major recruitment of better players and have decided not to fund it .Like most business men fans or not, they are in it for the profit
Now they want out asap and if they makes a hefty profit they will see it as a bonus

[edlass]

Hi Grumps. At first i thought you were suggesting we as fans give Farnell a chance but from the recent posts I am not sure now.

What people are saying is, if he is INVOLVED then they don't want that bid and it seems that he could be involved as their lawyer at least even if he wont have a role after. But are you suggesting that because of lack of hard evidence, that he might not actually involved at all? That he might not be their lawyer and he may not even know about this bid other than reading the papers like anyone else? At lease we all know where each other stands then!

Cheers!

[gandhisflipflop]

I read a post on here earlier that someone would stop supporting the club after 40 years if this takeover goes through, alluding to the point that we have never had investment. I dont have time to go back through the posts yet to find it but for one I'm not sure how Barry Kilby would feel about that statement as it was his investment in the 90s that got us out of the old division two and secondly, stop supporting after 40 years? Really? Maybe it would be a blessing because it's exactly that kind of mentality which has been holding the club back. There is a huge football world outside of local Burnley and it's about time we joined it instead of thinking the world starts and bloody ends in burnley. A takeover is needed. It may be bad news, but it may be amazing news but isn't that the fun? It won't or shouldn't stop you supporting the club.

As for this thread, another day going by with nothing happening and the closer we get to January, the more nervous I become because it drastically needs to happen to enable the squad to be strengthened which is so desperately needed.

[Chester Perry]

Our present board have realised we need a major recruitment of better players and have decided not to fund it .Like most business men fans or not, they are in it for the profit
Now they want out asap and if they makes a hefty profit they will see it as a bonus

and how were they to fund it - they don't have the ready cash and the club does not make enough to fund significant spending without sales - and before you say the cash pile, that was put aside to meet existing commitments, including the academy, should the "fine margins" not fall our way.

[Grumps]

Hi Grumps. At first i thought you were suggesting we as fans give Farnell a chance but from the recent posts I am not sure now.

What people are saying is, if he is INVOLVED then they don't want that bid and it seems that he could be involved as their lawyer at least even if he wont have a role after. But are you suggesting that because of lack of hard evidence, that he might not actually involved at all? That he might not be their lawyer and he may not even know about this bid other than reading the papers like anyone else? At lease we all know where each other stands then!

Cheers!

Out of politeness I will reply, but I have been warned off this topic
Basically we don't really know anything I don't know if he's involved or not
I don't support one bid or the other
I just like to deal in facts.

[Rileybobs]

Where is the logic behind a ground move? The way I see it Turf Moor is protected by a covenant which means that changing it's use would be a huge planning and legal battle. Where is the value in the ground? What would be built in it's place? Where do we move to and how do we fund the land acquisition and new stadium? Where is the significant increased revenue generated by the new stadium coming from to make this worthwhile?

[ewanrob]

Where is the logic behind a ground move? The way I see it Turf Moor is protected by a covenant which means that changing it's use would be a huge planning and legal battle. Where is the value in the ground? What would be built in it's place? Where do we move to and how do we fund the land acquisition and new stadium? Where is the significant increased revenue generated by the new stadium coming from to make this worthwhile?

Well maybe if the new owners do appear, they could offer the cricket club something that is to good to turn down and finally put that land to good use....Hotel etc

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Well maybe if the new owners do appear, they could offer the cricket club something that is to good to turn down and finally put that land to good use....Hotel etc

A hotel?

That was a drain on Reading FC, and Bolton I think, so no we don't need a hotel bolted onto the side of TM

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Our present board have realised we need a major recruitment of better players and have decided not to fund it .Like most business men fans or not, they are in it for the profit
Now they want out asap and if they makes a hefty profit they will see it as a bonus

Decided not to fund it?

Are you referring to their lack of desire to spend their own hard earned money for no return, to avoid whinging fans who would only complain if the owners took money out of the club?

Or did you mean to type, "they realise that the current business model means the funds aren't there for substantial spending on players.."?

[Quickenthetempo]

A hotel?

That was a drain on Reading FC, and Bolton I think, so no we don't need a hotel bolted onto the side of TM

I thought the hotel sold for more than the football club at Bolton?

[Dark Cloud]

Fair points TsarBomba, I'm of the same view. To be honest, I'm pretty sceptical of any take over talk, generally speaking once you hear about a deal in the media then it's probably not happening.

But let's say it did happen, and even more unlikely, they actually wanted to invest / chuck money away and relocate. It makes perfect sense. None of the complications and hassle or redeveloping a cramped existing site. It'd probably pull more fans in. But that'd be it for me going regularly.

I'd maybe go to the odd match but this break has made me realise I'm not that fussed about Burnley playing football. It's as much about the nostalgia, familiarity and tradition of the club, the ground, the pubs and people. Going to watch in a bowl next to a motorway, like Horwich Wanderers, and we'll just be another Reading.

But I totally get a football club doesn't exist to pander to one fan's minority view so it feels inevitable at some point, just hope not for a while yet.

In fairness Notts, it's not one fan's minority view as I believe the majority of us feel like that and furthermore I'd suggest a majority of fans at clubs which have moved out of town probably feel like that, but for them it really is too late. Sadly I unfortunately think, as mentioned above, that new owners may see it differently and look at moving versus re development and come to one obvious conclusion, but I suspect there would be huge resistance and as you say, going to watch the Clarets would never, ever hold the same draw.

[jrgbfc]

Everytime I go to a soulless out of town ground like the Reebok I always think how much I'd hate it if we ever moved somewhere like that. Would probably be enough to make me stop going.

[ewanrob]

A hotel?

That was a drain on Reading FC, and Bolton I think, so no we don't need a hotel bolted onto the side of TM

Etc...im sure someone with capital and vision could potentially turn that into something...wasnt there once plans drawn up for something similar.

[Royboyclaret]

I suspect this was a case of putting a few speculative posts together and getting another speculative post.

I would guess (and it's entirely a guess) that the earlier reference was to Flood staying on and someone took it to mean Garlick.

Must admit to thinking along similar lines over the last few days.

Perhaps we are closer to identifying the mystery man who walked into our Boardroom with the second bid in his pocket?.........If so it sure represents the full turn of the circle for our man over the last ten years or so. Back to being the in-house frontman would be somewhat ironic.

Fascinating few days ahead.

[Dyched]

There’s more than enough room to redevelop the Turf. All the room round the back of the 2 newer stands, plus lots of wasted space out front of the Bob Lord. If they did the Bob Lord first our capacity wouldn’t drop massively during the redevelopment.

[BenWickes]

My take on that from what little we know or think we know. ALK woukd invest in a slower more pragmatic way...perhaps in the mould of Brentford. Buying wisely and within our relative means. Allowing us better spending power but also allowing us to keep the community feel to the club.
The Egyptians bid i assume will chuck money at it a little more..maybe we would move stadium and radically change the feel of the club. No more little Burnley punching above their weight. However this will come with risk as it would raise us way above our natural level and the bigger risk of it going pop..like at Bolton or a slower death like at Blackburn.

Or am i completely misjudging the two bids?

You'd be correct in your assumption ALK want it to remain a focal point of the community so would be looking at redeveloping Turf Moor rather than upping sticks. The latter being an absolute last resort. There'll be finances to invest in players alongside redevelopment and I believe a considerable amount more for Barnfield. However more restrained than bid 2.
I wouldn't necessarily use Brentford as a yardstick but yes it would be a more pragmatic approach.

[jrgbfc]

I know we're all guessing a bit but from what I've heard I'd be far happier if the ALK bid was the winner.

[Paul Waine]

Why is status quo never a realistic option?

Hi dsr, Status Quo, 1974 "Down Down."

Lyrics
Get down deeper and down
Down, down deeper and down
Down, down deeper and down
Get down deeper and down

I want all the world to see
To see you're laughing, and you're laughing at me
I can take it all from you

That's why Status Quo isn't a realistic option for Burnley FC.

And all the other Premier League clubs are operating at another financial level, so that the status quo has moved away from BFC's model and our local, Burnley fans ownership can't provide the finances to keep up with the EPL "status quo."

So, it's either new investors or "down, down deeper and down."

UTC

[CrosspoolClarets]

Why is status quo never a realistic option?

Because there is no such thing.

The playing squad ages and needs replenishing.

The ground ages and needs replenishing.

The fans......(ok, ok, I’m depressing myself now, but you get the gist).

We have to remain a viable entertainment option for a new generation of fans when us lot are old and knackered. I can’t see many youngsters nowadays, certainly not from out of the area, finding it appealing to going on the Turf in its current state. If I was buying a business like BFC, that would be at the front of my mind.

[dsr]

Because there is no such thing.

The playing squad ages and needs replenishing.

The ground ages and needs replenishing.

The fans......(ok, ok, I’m depressing myself now, but you get the gist).

We have to remain a viable entertainment option for a new generation of fans when us lot are old and knackered. I can’t see many youngsters nowadays, certainly not from out of the area, finding it appealing to going on the Turf in its current state. If I was buying a business like BFC, that would be at the front of my mind.

I didn't realise you were talking about minutiae like player retirements. I thought you meant grand sweeping changes like new grounds and instant squad rebuilds. As far as I am concerned, what we have seen for the last 8 years has been status quo in spite of the almost total squad rebuild.

[Paul Waine]

Because there is no such thing.

The playing squad ages and needs replenishing.

The ground ages and needs replenishing.

The fans......(ok, ok, I’m depressing myself now, but you get the gist).

We have to remain a viable entertainment option for a new generation of fans when us lot are old and knackered. I can’t see many youngsters nowadays, certainly not from out of the area, finding it appealing to going on the Turf in its current state. If I was buying a business like BFC, that would be at the front of my mind.

Good points, Crosspool. It's true that - however good the c-19 vaccines - all our fans that have been supporting the Clarets for 30,40, 50 and 60 seasons are not getting any younger. I'm sure new investors will love our loyalty and longevity, but, even if they adopt "Forever Young" as the club's welcome to the team every home game, the new investors will only be able to take the club forward by thinking about the up-coming generations.

Hey, and I'd been a Burnley fan and coming on t'Turf for a good few seasons before I ever heard Status Quo perform "Down Down."

UTC

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I thought the hotel sold for more than the football club at Bolton?

Dunno, it was loss making for a while I think, I know it definitely was down at Reading.

[Leisure]

But let's say it did happen, and even more unlikely, they actually wanted to invest / chuck money away and relocate. It makes perfect sense. None of the complications and hassle or redeveloping a cramped existing site. It'd probably pull more fans in. But that'd be it for me going regularly.

I have the opposite view to this, as I feel that by relocating we would lose many of the existing fanbase and I'm not clear just where new fans to replace them (never mind increase our attendances) would come from?

[ClaretTony]

My take on that from what little we know or think we know. ALK woukd invest in a slower more pragmatic way...perhaps in the mould of Brentford. Buying wisely and within our relative means. Allowing us better spending power but also allowing us to keep the community feel to the club.
The Egyptians bid i assume will chuck money at it a little more..maybe we would move stadium and radically change the feel of the club. No more little Burnley punching above their weight. However this will come with risk as it would raise us way above our natural level and the bigger risk of it going pop..like at Bolton or a slower death like at Blackburn.

Or am i completely misjudging the two bids?

Can’t say too much about the second bid because there isn’t enough to go on but regards ALK I’ve been told they don’t want to move, they like the idea of the ground being central. Not so sure on Brentford being a model but they have a major interest in improving the academy and at all levels. From what I understand they are very much football people.

[ewanrob]

Can’t say too much about the second bid because there isn’t enough to go on but regards ALK I’ve been told they don’t want to move, they like the idea of the ground being central. Not so sure on Brentford being a model but they have a major interest in improving the academy and at all levels. From what I understand they are very much football people.

So Tony, do you have anything on where their bid is at the moment...you would imagine by now the Club have a preffered bidder. I think its not only important we get new players in, but also get the likes of Tarks to sign new long term better money deals...if that is at all.possible and he's not a ship thats sailed, im assuming he has not totally discounted signing a new long term big money deal.

[ClaretTony]

So Tony, do you have anything on where their bid is at the moment...you would imagine by now the Club have a preffered bidder. I think its not only important we get new players in, but also get the likes of Tarks to sign new long term better money deals...if that is at all.possible and he's not a ship thats sailed, im assuming he has not totally discounted signing a new long term big money deal.

I don't think we've a chance of Tarky signing a new deal to be honest.

As for takeover bids, no idea where they are. I haven't asked anyone involved and in any case they wouldn't be able to tell me anything, I would assume they've all signed NDAs.

[aggi]

It would be profitable for the developers. It may not have long term viability but the developers will have cut and run by then.

Well obviously, but what would be in it for the club who would be paying the developers?

[aggi]

Near zero interest rates has to change the model a bit, as does the possibility of borrowing money (hypothetically) from an overseas state (not sure of FFP etc). If the development can turn a profit annually, the depreciation / debt repayment may become less of a relevance compared to a traditional development.

Then we have the intangibles - the benefit from an increased visibility in the country / world, having one of the Premier League 20 grounds, of which only half will have had major developments recently, that can be a big attraction (e.g. to a country needing huge development for a future world cup like Qatar has done, which our owner/developer may look to get involved in). We then get the Northern Powerhouse angle too, as an “in” into those billions sloshing around soon.

So it may not stack up in the way accountants may traditionally do it, but I believe it would be deemed to be attractive to do, for certain people.

But you still have the capital expenditure, regardless of how it's financed. Would it turn more of a profit than the current position is the question?

The intangibles can obviously cut both ways, is a new, out of town ground going to be a bigger draw than the current traditional ground and given the current climate I can't see a Premier League football club being a likely recipient of those Northern Powerhouse billions (obviously that's setting aside the likelihood of there actually being Northern Powerhouse billions sloshing around).

You can never say never but until it gets to the position where Turf Moor is worth some decent money then I'd say it's difficult to make a move work.

[aggi]

The Bolton hotel was much more sought after than the football club when for sale.

Apparently the same applies for a chippy at Wigan.

It's possible that there may be a good business in there somewhere but it's made consistent losses.

[Dark Cloud]

I know we're all guessing a bit but from what I've heard I'd be far happier if the ALK bid was the winner.

I totally agree. Our information is very limited and much of it is paper talk, rumour and speculation and we have to accept that, but ALK SEEMS to be a far better option right now.

[BenWickes]

Regards to the bids. One is based on community, strengthening what's already been achieved and taking it to a new level we couldn't have done with the current board. Think of it in computer parlance as a Dyche Plus Extra upgrade. The other. A bit more fast and loose and therefore more fraught with danger. Although it would include a more significant input financially. For every Man City/Chelsea there is a Portsmouth or Bolton. More of a Man City approach. Both committed to community but one more acceptable to fans by and large. The other an aggressive push.

[Dark Cloud]

Regards to the bids. One is based on community, strengthening what's already been achieved and taking it to a new level we couldn't have done with the current board. Think of it in computer parlance as a Dyche Plus Extra upgrade. The other. A bit more fast and loose and therefore more fraught with danger. Although it would include a more significant input financially. For every Man City/Chelsea there is a Portsmouth or Bolton. More of a Man City approach. Both committed to community but one more acceptable to fans by and large. The other an aggressive push.

Well making a leap of faith and assuming you know what you're on about here, it simply reinforces the fact that ALK looks better to most of us. Primarily because anything with less danger or wild promises sounds good to me and anything that doesn't have the word Farnell in it sounds even better.

[Vegas Claret]

I want someone to come in and give Dyche 400 million to spend in January and not want any of it back......

[jrgbfc]

Problem is our squad has got to the stage where it needs a huge amount of money spending on it just to stay competitive at this level.
Has the bid Farnell is fronting really got that sort of financial clout?

[Dark Cloud]

I want someone to come in and give Dyche 400 million to spend in January and not want any of it back......

If we're 10 points adrift at the bottom, it probably won't be enough!!

[Nonayforever]

Well obviously, but what would be in it for the club who would be paying the developers?

The club wouldn't be paying the developers. The club would be the nucleus, the equity to take the development forward.

Essentially, the club would be just another tenant, such as a Costa, Sports Direct, Witherspoons and a Premier Inn etc. Once up and running with tenants locked into long term leases it then becomes extremely valuable to a property company, then the developers ( owners of Burnley ) cash out.

Meanwhile the owners of burnley entertain the agents ( as back in Howes day) and sign a better quality of player keeping the ball in the air (sic).

[randomclaret2]

I want someone to come in and give Dyche 400 million to spend in January and not want any of it back......

First signing...Lansbury

[Rileybobs]

The club wouldn't be paying the developers. The club would be the nucleus, the equity to take the development forward.

Essentially, the club would be just another tenant, such as a Costa, Sports Direct, Witherspoons and a Premier Inn etc. Once up and running with tenants locked into long term leases it then becomes extremely valuable to a property company, then the developers ( owners of Burnley ) cash out.

Meanwhile the owners of burnley entertain the agents ( as back in Howes day) and sign a better quality of player keeping the ball in the air (sic).

Why would investors spend £200m on a football club and then spend more money by relocating them away from their ground in order to build a hotel? I think it would be substantially quicker, cheaper and easier for them to just buy some land and build their hotel and retail complex.

[Dark Cloud]

First signing...Lansbury

My thoughts exactly. He'd probably take the 400 million and sign two 34 year olds we've been "chasing" for 7 years!!

[Chester Perry]

I want someone to come in and give Dyche 400 million to spend in January and not want any of it back......

If they are on 5 year contracts we would just get that past FFP for a season, but would have to find a huge uplift in revenue beyond that (around £150m a year uplift when you include wages with the amortisation

[Somethingfishy]

Regards to the bids. One is based on community, strengthening what's already been achieved and taking it to a new level we couldn't have done with the current board. Think of it in computer parlance as a Dyche Plus Extra upgrade. The other. A bit more fast and loose and therefore more fraught with danger. Although it would include a more significant input financially. For every Man City/Chelsea there is a Portsmouth or Bolton. More of a Man City approach. Both committed to community but one more acceptable to fans by and large. The other an aggressive push.

So a modest slow growth investment or a billy big b***** one where we chuck money at it and perhaps get a shiny new ground? One is certainly riskier but the stature change would be incredible. Either one sounds like it will change the club significantly and obviously one more than the other. I think it's safe to say the club is at probably one of the biggest crossroads it has and possibly will ever come across.

[Vegas Claret]

If they are on 5 year contracts we would just get that past FFP for a season, but would have to find a huge uplift in revenue beyond that (around £150m a year uplift when you include wages with the amortisation

I thought with FFP you just get a fine nowadays ?