Blackburn Rovers fans have many concerns about the club’s future, as Venky’s continue to limit investment in the squad. The supporters’ frustrations at the owners’ frugal approach was shared by the last two managers, as they both left for greener pastures, complaining of a lack of money.
The departure of John Eustace in February 2025 was described
by the Rovers Trust as “heartbreaking”, when the manager opted to leave Rovers
while they were in the top six in order to move to Derby County, who were in
the relegation zone at the time. The Trust said that this was “a damning
indictment of everything that is wrong about our club.”
This situation was horribly familiar, as a disillusioned Jan
Dahl Tomasson had also left Ewood Park 12 months earlier, after he was given a
reduced transfer budget, which meant that the club had to pull out of a couple
of important deals just as the players were about to put pen to paper.
This was the third time in four years that Rovers had a
decent chance of reaching the play-offs, but the owners were unwilling (or
unable) to support the manager in the January window, always leaving them just
short.
The bad vibes around the club have not been helped by the
recent decision to withdraw the women’s team from Super League 2 on cost
grounds, while the departure of chief executive Steve Waggott after seven years
in charge has increased the uncertainty.
In 2023/24 Rovers swung from a £20.9m pre-tax loss to a
£3.3m profit. However, the improvement was almost entirely due to profit from
player sales surging from just £349k to £23.6m.
At an operating level, Rovers still lost £19.5m, though this was £1.4m
better than the previous year. Revenue rose £0.4m (2%) from £21.0m to £21.4m,
while operating expenses were cut £1.0m (2%) from £41.9m to £40.9m. On the
other hand, net interest payable increased from £0.3m to £0.7m.
In the last 10 years they have lost £115m, though losses
have reduced since the substantial deficits in the first two seasons in the
Championship after relegation: £37m in 2012/13 and £42m in 2013/14.
Player sales
Rovers’ £23.6m profit from player sales last season was a
new high for the club, overtaking the previous peak of £22.9m in 2011/12. It is
worth noting that the proceeds from the Wharton sale represented pure profit,
as he was an Academy product.
This season will also be quite good after Sammie Szmodics
was sold to Ipswich Town. In addition, Sam Gallagher moved to Stoke City and
Leopold Wahlstedt went to Aarhus. That said, the net profit in 2024/25 would
only have been around £12m, i.e. around half of last season, suggesting that
Rovers will once again report a net loss.
Whether Rovers have maximised the amounts they secured from
departures is debatable, especially as quite a few players have left on free
transfers, including Ben Brereton Diaz, Bradley Dack, Joe Rothwell and Bradley
Johnson.
Despite the recent growth, Rovers’ £21.4m revenue was one of
the lowest in the Championship, only above four clubs (Rotherham United,
Preston North End, Huddersfield Town and Hull City).
Rovers’ average attendance increased from 14,819 to 15,584,
then again to 16,212 last season. This has therefore grown by around 3,500
since the low in 2016/17. On the other
hand, they have lost over 9,000 since the 25,427 that they attracted in the
2009/10 Premier League.
Despite the increase, Rovers’ 15,583 average attendance in
2023/24 was the second smallest in the Championship, only above Rotherham
United. To further place this into perspective, it was less than half of
Sunderland 41,028, Leeds United 35,989 and Leicester City 31,238. Many fans don’t want to attend games, because
of their dislike of the ownership, so Rovers’ stadium utilisation was only 50%,
which was by far the worst in the Championship.
The wage bill slightly fell £0.4m (1%) from £25.8m to
£25.4m. This has been more or less at the same level for the last five years,
while other clubs have increased the amount they paid, thus making life more
difficult for Rovers.
Rovers’ £766k directors remuneration was actually the third
highest in the Championship, which might come as a surprise to the club’s
supporters, given the limited investment in the squad.
Rovers spent just £1.4m on player purchases in 2023/24,
which was one of the lowest in the Championship, only above QPR and WBA. In fact, their gross outlay in the last
decade was only £28m, while they spent just £14m in the last five years. They invested a little more money in
2024/25, but still didn’t exactly push the boat out, as the outlay was still
only around £4m. Many supporters cannot
understand why more of the large fees received for Wharton and Szmodics has not
been used to strengthen the squad.
Rovers have an excellent Category One Academy, which has
saved them a lot of money in transfer fees.
Rovers’ gross financial debt rose £6m from £142m to £148m,
mainly a £134m loan from Venky’s and a £13m overdraft. In fact, they actually had the 11th highest
debt in the whole of England at the end of the 2023/24 season.
Since Venky’s bought the club, they have effectively been
Rovers’ only source of funds, contributing £188m of the £203m available cash in
the last 24 years, with another £13m (net) coming from player trading. The £188m that the Venky’s have put into the
club means that they have basically signed a cheque for £14m a year ever since
their arrival at Ewood Park.
Many Rovers’ fans must be asking exactly what Venky’s get
out of their ownership. It is true that
the owners’ funding has been invaluable, but they have made numerous mistakes
since the takeover, while their ambition does seem extremely limited.
As Blackburn Rovers come up their 150th anniversary, it’s
fair to say that the fans’ relationship with the owners is far from great, as
the owners’ lack of commitment has effectively left the club in limbo.
In fairness, Rovers have narrowly missed out on the play-offs
twice in the last three seasons, but both the coaches that took them there have
exited stage left, disillusioned with the limited funds made available to them.
Rovers’ relatively low revenue means that they will always
face a tough challenge in the Championship, competing against clubs with much
higher spending power, especially those benefiting from parachute payments, but
it does feel like they are not being given the best chance to succeed.
The best thing for all concerned would probably be a change
of ownership.
Comments
Post a Comment