ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
-
- Posts: 6975
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:25 pm
- Been Liked: 1490 times
- Has Liked: 1848 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
I accept directors as a necessary evil but they are businessmen out to make a profit
I also dont get some fans love in with our board,especially our chairman whose blocking funds to Sean hasn't helped in the last few windows
I also dont get some fans love in with our board,especially our chairman whose blocking funds to Sean hasn't helped in the last few windows
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
It is highly likely that we will get relegated at some point in the future. What would you have expected to have happened under existing ownership, compared with new, say, ALK ownership?
Under the current ownership I would have expected us to rely on a combination of relegation clauses, the older stalwarts sticking around, and the sale of our most marketable playing assets. We would never have generated sufficient cash reserves to build an effective buffer against relegation. The player sale proceeds would be used, in part to fund the player wages shortfall, and in part to rebuild and rebalance the squad to make us very competitive in the Championship.
Under new ownership, I would expect the same BUT key player sale proceeds will be used to repay the debt created from the investment. The playing assets are effectively the security against which the investment is being made. That takes us back to square one in the Championship.
So, what is the net effect of this investment? It is the realisation of the playing assets NOW, in the pockets of the current directors, rather than in our potential time of need, i.e relegation. Now, if you always thought MG would do an Oyston and trouser the cash from player sales as Burnley slipped down the leagues, then there is nothing to see here. But if you were in any way relying on those sale proceeds for the benefit of the Club in harder times such as relegation, you may need to think again.
Under the current ownership I would have expected us to rely on a combination of relegation clauses, the older stalwarts sticking around, and the sale of our most marketable playing assets. We would never have generated sufficient cash reserves to build an effective buffer against relegation. The player sale proceeds would be used, in part to fund the player wages shortfall, and in part to rebuild and rebalance the squad to make us very competitive in the Championship.
Under new ownership, I would expect the same BUT key player sale proceeds will be used to repay the debt created from the investment. The playing assets are effectively the security against which the investment is being made. That takes us back to square one in the Championship.
So, what is the net effect of this investment? It is the realisation of the playing assets NOW, in the pockets of the current directors, rather than in our potential time of need, i.e relegation. Now, if you always thought MG would do an Oyston and trouser the cash from player sales as Burnley slipped down the leagues, then there is nothing to see here. But if you were in any way relying on those sale proceeds for the benefit of the Club in harder times such as relegation, you may need to think again.
This user liked this post: WalkdenClaret
-
- Posts: 6905
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
- Been Liked: 2758 times
- Has Liked: 4325 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Were you happy with us being in the 4th Division for 7 years, close to extinction at one point, but ' locally owned ' ?AfloatinClaret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 9:57 amWhat's with the "no longer"? I've never wanted a takeover and would much prefer the club to remain locally owned; if that eventually saw us playing back in the Championship, or even lower, the so be it.
-
- Posts: 1360
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 9:56 pm
- Been Liked: 225 times
- Has Liked: 248 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
If the board bought one or two new better players than what we have there is no need for a takeover, this is basically what Dyche is asking for no?
-
- Posts: 2575
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:49 am
- Been Liked: 640 times
- Has Liked: 674 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Looks like we're just waiting for Premier League approval, which I can only assume is a formality?
-
- Posts: 8996
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2013 times
- Has Liked: 2913 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Can you imagine what the younger supporters would have made of Mr Teasdale’s time? They have no gauge and no idea, of what a bad time supporting Burnley is.
These 6 users liked this post: Claret Till I Die depechedingle tiger76 Somethingfishy Vegas Claret Juan Tanamera
-
- Posts: 17108
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
- Been Liked: 4384 times
- Has Liked: 15117 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
No criticism..... do You or anyone think the hierarchy at Burnley have taken no financial reward ...really?Dark Cloud wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:15 amIMO the directors have been brilliant for a number of years now and especially during the Dyche era. They have run the club well and prudently and as exactly as you would expect custodian/supporters to do. I would never criticise any of them as they've never taken a penny out of the club to my knowledge, it's never been about themselves or their own egos, unlike some chairmen and directors and they must have inadvertently spent loads in travel and other incidental expenses during their "labour of love". Fortunately for them they got really, really lucky with the appointment of SD and even luckier in that their shares which were worth next to nothing when they got into the club look like bringing them a hefty windfall. Good luck to them I say and I don't begrudge them anything they make, especially because making money was never their primary aim back at the start and never has been. I actually believe that they can see exactly what most of us can see and that is that for BFC to remain competitive in the PL (or even upper Championship) there needs to be investment well beyond anything they can personally afford and so they are gracefully trying to do their level best for the club by moving aside and selling out to someone they think/pray will provide that investment along with a safe pair of hands. Fingers crossed they get it right.
-
- Posts: 16899
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6965 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
What makes you think that there will be debt created from the investment?Duffer_ wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 10:46 amIt is highly likely that we will get relegated at some point in the future. What would you have expected to have happened under existing ownership, compared with new, say, ALK ownership?
Under the current ownership I would have expected us to rely on a combination of relegation clauses, the older stalwarts sticking around, and the sale of our most marketable playing assets. We would never have generated sufficient cash reserves to build an effective buffer against relegation. The player sale proceeds would be used, in part to fund the player wages shortfall, and in part to rebuild and rebalance the squad to make us very competitive in the Championship.
Under new ownership, I would expect the same BUT key player sale proceeds will be used to repay the debt created from the investment. The playing assets are effectively the security against which the investment is being made. That takes us back to square one in the Championship.
So, what is the net effect of this investment? It is the realisation of the playing assets NOW, in the pockets of the current directors, rather than in our potential time of need, i.e relegation. Now, if you always thought MG would do an Oyston and trouser the cash from player sales as Burnley slipped down the leagues, then there is nothing to see here. But if you were in any way relying on those sale proceeds for the benefit of the Club in harder times such as relegation, you may need to think again.
-
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:09 pm
- Been Liked: 1 time
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
You’d like to think it’s only a formality, however it dragged on for Newcastle but I don’t think ALK have links to piracy and a sketchy human rights record
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
The investment is not a gift so it requires repayment before the investors can secure a return on that investment. Whether it is push down debt on acquisition on the Balance Sheet or not is irrelevant to that point.
-
- Posts: 15260
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3164 times
- Has Liked: 6760 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
i'm interested to know the better informed posters opinion on the effect outside investment may have on the club's commitment to the local community.
-
- Posts: 16899
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6965 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Of course it’s not a gift. ALK are paying a reported £200m and in return they will acquire a profitable business with high-value assets.
We don’t know how ALK are funding the purchase and whether this will create a debt. And any talk of their strategy in running the club is pure guesswork.
-
- Posts: 2511
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:21 am
- Been Liked: 1666 times
- Has Liked: 2984 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Agree. We are a small town geographical-backwater club who have enjoyed 5 consecutive seasons of Premier League football and established a clear and proud identity, Look at our natural peer group......B'stards, Preston, Blackpool, Bolton, Hiddersfield, Blackpool......and consider how well the current board of local businessmen have done (obviously resting on Dyche) !! Consider how clubs such as Notts Forest, Sunderland, Boro,Sheff Weds must envy their achievements. Anyone seriously criticising them can't have much sense of reality.Dark Cloud wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:15 amIMO the directors have been brilliant for a number of years now and especially during the Dyche era. They have run the club well and prudently and as exactly as you would expect custodian/supporters to do. I would never criticise any of them as they've never taken a penny out of the club to my knowledge, it's never been about themselves or their own egos, unlike some chairmen and directors and they must have inadvertently spent loads in travel and other incidental expenses during their "labour of love". Fortunately for them they got really, really lucky with the appointment of SD and even luckier in that their shares which were worth next to nothing when they got into the club look like bringing them a hefty windfall. Good luck to them I say and I don't begrudge them anything they make, especially because making money was never their primary aim back at the start and never has been. I actually believe that they can see exactly what most of us can see and that is that for BFC to remain competitive in the PL (or even upper Championship) there needs to be investment well beyond anything they can personally afford and so they are gracefully trying to do their level best for the club by moving aside and selling out to someone they think/pray will provide that investment along with a safe pair of hands. Fingers crossed they get it right.
This user liked this post: Dark Cloud
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Not sure what point you are making here RileyBobs, or how that negates what I have said. I don't need to know their strategy to observe that, ceteris paribus, we have to generate £200m more "profit" in the new world to stand still, compared with the existing order.Rileybobs wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:12 amOf course it’s not a gift. ALK are paying a reported £200m and in return they will acquire a profitable business with high-value assets.
We don’t know how ALK are funding the purchase and whether this will create a debt. And any talk of their strategy in running the club is pure guesswork.
It may very well be that the new investors can generate that in improved exploitation of commercial opportunities, but it is big ask.
Please humour me and answer my question: What would you have expected to have happened [if we were relegated] under existing ownership, compared with new, say, ALK ownership? For sport, let's say that happens within the next 2 years.
-
- Posts: 16899
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6965 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
But they are buying a business that is worth £200m. So after 12 months, all being equal they could recoup their £200m by selling the club on. On this basis ALK don’t need to generate £200m of profit to see a return on their investment.Duffer_ wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:22 amNot sure what point you are making here RileyBobs, or how that negates what I have said. I don't need to know their strategy to observe that, ceteris paribus, we have to generate £200m more "profit" in the new world to stand still, compared with the existing order.
It may very well be that the new investors can generate that in improved exploitation of commercial opportunities, but it is big ask.
Please humour me and answer my question: What would you have expected to have happened [if we were relegated] under existing ownership, compared with new, say, ALK ownership? For sport, let's say that happens within the next 2 years.
As to your question, we have seen what happens with our current owners in a relegation scenario. I would expect us to retain the core of our squad on reduced salaries, sell one or two of our prime assets, and target a return to the Premier League within 2-3 seasons.
I have no idea how ALK will approach this scenario. They have the same players with relegation clauses in their contracts, but perhaps they may have the financial flexibility to throw some money into the club to increase the chance of an immediate return to the PL. But that is pure guesswork.
-
- Posts: 67895
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
No, the Christmas tree story and not being able to afford a decent one has become an annual joke. Last year it looked really sorry for itself and was knocked over during the press conference.gandhisflipflop wrote: ↑Wed Dec 23, 2020 10:02 pmA parting swipe in tonight’s press conference? Joking about the Christmas tree he said “it took me four years to get them to pay for a new tree that’s how the money can be in this place”
-
- Posts: 8996
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2013 times
- Has Liked: 2913 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
It had crossed my mind that ALK could be acting as agents to sell to a third party sooner rather than later, and hope part of the negotiation involves commitments as to future conduct going forward.Rileybobs wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:42 amBut they are buying a business that is worth £200m. So after 12 months, all being equal they could recoup their £200m by selling the club on. On this basis ALK don’t need to generate £200m of profit to see a return on their investment.
As to your question, we have seen what happens with our current owners in a relegation scenario. I would expect us to retain the core of our squad on reduced salaries, sell one or two of our prime assets, and target a return to the Premier League within 2-3 seasons.
I have no idea how ALK will approach this scenario. They have the same players with relegation clauses in their contracts, but perhaps they may have the financial flexibility to throw some money into the club to increase the chance of an immediate return to the PL. But that is pure guesswork.
-
- Posts: 67895
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
I'd cross that out of your mindelwaclaret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:50 amIt had crossed my mind that ALK could be acting as agents to sell to a third party sooner rather than later, and hope part of the negotiation involves commitments as to future conduct going forward.
These 2 users liked this post: elwaclaret randomclaret2
-
- Posts: 8996
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2013 times
- Has Liked: 2913 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
In a good way I hope
-
- Posts: 67895
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 984
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:44 am
- Been Liked: 170 times
- Has Liked: 45 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Somebody'told me Michael dell was involved in the investment how true that is time will tell.
This user liked this post: ClaretTony
-
- Posts: 2597
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 pm
- Been Liked: 674 times
- Has Liked: 244 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Apologies if I’ve missed someone else posting this..... but Chris Boden tweeted about an hour ago that ALK expect approval/announcement before the Leeds game. Fingers crossed.
These 4 users liked this post: Zom Zom randomclaret2 elwaclaret mkmel
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Hopefully alongside Bezos, Zukerberg and Gates.Sheedyclaret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:55 amSomebody'told me Michael dell was involved in the investment how true that is time will tell.
This user liked this post: mybloodisclaret
-
- Posts: 3233
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:36 am
- Been Liked: 1768 times
- Has Liked: 41 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Far too many folk in here making wild assumptions about imaginary scenarios without knowing any of the actual detail.
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
The profitability of a PL Club of our size is so volatile due to the constant threat of relegation. That is why the purchase price is basically that of the net asset value, which is primarily the playing squad. There is no mutilple of earnings being applied here. The playing squad, which previously was an unencumbered asset, is their security.Rileybobs wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:42 amBut they are buying a business that is worth £200m. So after 12 months, all being equal they could recoup their £200m by selling the club on. On this basis ALK don’t need to generate £200m of profit to see a return on their investment.
As to your question, we have seen what happens with our current owners in a relegation scenario. I would expect us to retain the core of our squad on reduced salaries, sell one or two of our prime assets, and target a return to the Premier League within 2-3 seasons.
I have no idea how ALK will approach this scenario. They have the same players with relegation clauses in their contracts, but perhaps they may have the financial flexibility to throw some money into the club to increase the chance of an immediate return to the PL. But that is pure guesswork.
Of course the investor could 'double down' and invest heavily following relegation but the history of smaller Clubs says otherwise. You need to look no further than Blackburn to see how an investor might behave in such circumstances. The Venkys realised assets to mitigate their losses. The only surprise is that they did not trim operating costs further.
I would suggest a rational investor is more likely to prefer a bird in the hand, and sell our most marketable assets to mitigate their exposure. We are then facing a much longer term re-building phase and any advantage from our recent PL status is immediately lost.
-
- Posts: 5125
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:50 am
- Been Liked: 1127 times
- Has Liked: 1238 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Don't get all this sentimental clap trap about the club being owned by local people, only thing that matters is the results on the pitch.
I have seen little interaction between the present board and fans over the last couple of years and they certainly haven't done the manager any favours in the last few transfer windows.
Dyche as got little support from the board over the last 12 months, he is the fella they should thank when the deal is finalised for their healthy profit, but for Dyche they could have been facing a very different future
I have seen little interaction between the present board and fans over the last couple of years and they certainly haven't done the manager any favours in the last few transfer windows.
Dyche as got little support from the board over the last 12 months, he is the fella they should thank when the deal is finalised for their healthy profit, but for Dyche they could have been facing a very different future
These 2 users liked this post: mill hill claret fatboy47
-
- Posts: 5092
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:15 am
- Been Liked: 1181 times
- Has Liked: 637 times
- Location: Tibet
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
So today would be a good day to wrap this up , but hey will settle before the New Year hopefully .
-
- Posts: 13510
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3114 times
- Has Liked: 3833 times
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Do you have any idea where the money is coming from yet Tony?
-
- Posts: 13510
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3114 times
- Has Liked: 3833 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Just reading a BBC page about a popular topic and one reporter wrote:
Right now, I’m reminded that the word “imminent” has, over the last four and a half years, become the most elastic piece of vocabulary imaginable.
Although, come to think of it, “deadline” runs it close.
And then there is the boat load full of Brexit clichés.
"Final push.”
“Eleventh hour.”
“Five to midnight.”
Apparently colourful phrases, increasingly shorn of meaning, bobbing around in an ocean of words, while we wait for the only ones that really matter.
Tell us about it....
Right now, I’m reminded that the word “imminent” has, over the last four and a half years, become the most elastic piece of vocabulary imaginable.
Although, come to think of it, “deadline” runs it close.
And then there is the boat load full of Brexit clichés.
"Final push.”
“Eleventh hour.”
“Five to midnight.”
Apparently colourful phrases, increasingly shorn of meaning, bobbing around in an ocean of words, while we wait for the only ones that really matter.
Tell us about it....
-
- Posts: 6905
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
- Been Liked: 2758 times
- Has Liked: 4325 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
That in practical terms would surely mean today then ?Jakubs Tash wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:57 amApologies if I’ve missed someone else posting this..... but Chris Boden tweeted about an hour ago that ALK expect approval/announcement before the Leeds game. Fingers crossed.
-
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 10:01 am
- Been Liked: 546 times
- Has Liked: 51 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Sheedyclaret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:55 amSomebody'told me Michael dell was involved in the investment how true that is time will tell.
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
I would have to agree with this.Top Claret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:14 pmDon't get all this sentimental clap trap about the club being owned by local people, only thing that matters is the results on the pitch.
In this regard however it needs to be pointed out that we finished 10th in the Prenier League at the end of last season...that feels like success to me measured against any sensible yardstick. The start of this season was awful but it looks very much as if this was due to injuries as our current form (statistically) is good and the football is improving also. (Edited for spelling)
Whether or not this is due to the fact that we are owned by local people is doubtful....but my impression as an ordinary fan is that we have had continuity in the boardroom (with some evolution when Mike Garlick/John B took over) ever since the late 90s and that this has served us well. Local or not these men have made more right decisions than wrong ones. Hopefully selling now is another good decision for Burnley FC.
Last edited by keith1879 on Thu Dec 24, 2020 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: mill hill claret
-
- Posts: 6652
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 2006 times
- Has Liked: 3347 times
-
- Posts: 13510
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3114 times
- Has Liked: 3833 times
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
A mega wealthy investor like that is a dream scenario and that wouldn’t happen to us. Looking forward to having some idea of where the funding is coming from though!Sheedyclaret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:55 amSomebody'told me Michael dell was involved in the investment how true that is time will tell.
-
- Posts: 67895
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32546 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Not a clue and that's a question that needs answering. I'd no idea with the others either. The only thing I am aware of is that the ALK bid is not just one or two investors. I don't think anything will be happening this side of the Turkey but confident of having new ownership by the time we are singing Auld Lang Syne.
These 3 users liked this post: randomclaret2 mill hill claret mybloodisclaret
-
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:41 pm
- Been Liked: 468 times
- Has Liked: 333 times
- Location: Malabo, EG/Chester
- Contact:
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Wonderful time scale and puts it into a great perspectiveClaretTony wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 2:20 pmNot a clue and that's a question that needs answering. I'd no idea with the others either. The only thing I am aware of is that the ALK bid is not just one or two investors. I don't think anything will be happening this side of the Turkey but confident of having new ownership by the time we are singing Auld Lang Syne.
Merry Christmas.
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
All things being equal I don't see what "ceteris paribus" adds to that statement. Any road up, it's not true. Obviously ALK are expecting something quid pro quo. We don't have to generate 200m, grosso modo we need to generate an acceptable return on 200m that's all. Other than that it's solito negotium.Duffer_ wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:22 amNot sure what point you are making here RileyBobs, or how that negates what I have said. I don't need to know their strategy to observe that, ceteris paribus, we have to generate £200m more "profit" in the new world to stand still, compared with the existing order.
These 2 users liked this post: Duffer_ mybloodisclaret
-
- Posts: 3554
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:15 am
- Been Liked: 1047 times
- Has Liked: 1187 times
- Location: Reading
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Can you get any more Latin into a couple.of sentences ?dibraidio wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 2:26 pmAll things being equal I don't see what "ceteris paribus" adds to that statement. Any road up, it's not true. Obviously ALK are expecting something quid pro quo. We don't have to generate 200m, grosso modo we need to generate an acceptable return on 200m that's all. Other than that it's solito negotium.
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Good luck generating operating profits sufficient to service a £200m investment in the Championship.dibraidio wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 2:26 pmAll things being equal I don't see what "ceteris paribus" adds to that statement. Any road up, it's not true. Obviously ALK are expecting something quid pro quo. We don't have to generate 200m, grosso modo we need to generate an acceptable return on 200m that's all. Other than that it's solito negotium.
-
- Posts: 4151
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:39 pm
- Been Liked: 698 times
- Has Liked: 608 times
- Location: Wexford, Ireland. via Nelson.
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
Sounds more like bullsh*t to me
-
- Posts: 4151
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:39 pm
- Been Liked: 698 times
- Has Liked: 608 times
- Location: Wexford, Ireland. via Nelson.
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Reading some of the above post, Happy New Year Burnley?
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
Or Sunday morning.randomclaret2 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:36 pmThat in practical terms would surely mean today then ?
It would be a nice boost.
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
We are in the Premier League, ALK are spending £200M to buy a Premier League club.
These 3 users liked this post: Leisure mill hill claret mybloodisclaret
Re: Criticism of the Directors ...
If ALK are prepared to pay that amount for the club, then that's what it's worth.
This user liked this post: mill hill claret
Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover
I would say that any comparison with Venkys taking over Blackburn is misplaced. There initial failure was solely due to incompetence on their part and not to their wanting to take money from the club. In more recent years, they have been excellent owners, benefactors rather than investors, and I don't think they have any real expectation of getting a return on the large sums they have donated to Rovers. ALK, one hopes, will not be as incompetent as Venkys were (that would be hard act to follow), but they certainly won't be benefactors in the way the Venkys are now.