JR stirring it

[TommyC]

I was being facetious yes.

Having said that, I would nevertheless still ask why you would give someone shares that are worthless?

When given to an employee as one poster has suggested they do still tend to have value as a reward or bonus or in some form of salary sacrifice arrangement. It could be in return for a job well done for example. Hopefully that isn't the case here. Either way though, they tend to have value either through being able to be sold on or through conveying some form of dividend or a right to payment on a sale of the Company.

I agree the VSCs shares in the subsidiary DRFC will be worth nothing. They probably will have little to no voting rights and most definitely won't have a right to a dividend.  They're a token gesture. They represent 100k shares out of a total share capital of in excess of 33 million shares....in the subsidiary company. As you say, utterly worthless.

However I'm talking about the 96 million shares that GB and DB EACH hold in the topco (Club Doncaster) that actually owns and controls DRFC. Their respective 96 million shares each is the exact same amount of shares as held by TB.

Please could you explain to me how a football club works Silent Majority?

Our shares are not in a subsidiary company, and that token gesture cost the VSC in excess of £100,000.

Three points from Silent Majority's replies:

1. Doncaster Rovers Limited owns the football club assets. Sitting above that, Club Doncaster Limited owns 98.424% of the shares in Doncaster Rovers Limited and exercises absolute control over Doncaster Rovers Limited. I would say that is indeed a subsidiary and Club Doncaster is the Holding Company.  The VSC holds a shareholding equivalent to 0.32% of the issued share capital in Doncaster Rovers Limited. Doncaster Rugby League Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Club Doncaster. Doncaster Rovers Limited is a 98.424% owned subsidiary of Club Doncaster. Club Doncaster effectively owns and controls them both.

2. I remember the much publicised "memorandum of understanding" to which you refer. I'm sure you'll correct me if i'm wrong here but it's not legally binding though is it? If they wanted real power to attach the shares given to the VSC, they could have simply issued the VSC with one share (a "golden share" as it is sometimes called) that had certain rights of veto or enhanced decision making powers. They didn't do that. If Club Doncaster being the holders of 98.4% of the Shares in Doncaster Rovers wanted to take a certain course of action that the VSC disagreed with, what ability the VSC has to alter that? What magic rights does that 0.32% confer? I'm genuinely interested to know. I suspect the answer with be nothing. We all know that £100k of shares wont be able to be sold or monetised in any way. So what rights to they actually confer to the VSC? There are no different rights attached to the shares in issue according to Companies House however i'd presume there is a separate Shareholders Agreement is in existence that gives the VSC some teeth. Without it i struggle to see where any value or influence attaches to those 107,000 shares held by thh VSC.

3. On the one hand you strive to defenfd the value of the 107,000 (0.32% of the whole) shares held by the VSC in a subsidiary of Club Doncaster and cite the £100,000 paid. Conversely, you suggest the 96 million shares held by Gavin Baldwin and David Blunt in the holding company that has absolute control over both Doncaster Rovers Limited and Doncaster Rugby League Limited are worthless. Which is it to be?

[silent majority]

Terry is not going to be involved for that much longer. The guy is 80 this year. He won’t need this hassle at his age. We’ve got to get soon to a stage where we are relatively sustainable. This gives us some stability for when he is not involved, and potentially then make us a more attractive option for external investment that might come. To get there we either have to cut outgoings or increase incomings. We have to choose one of them.

We're already at that point.

So TB is no longer putting funds into the club and the funds for the club are coming from Club Doncaster ???

It's not that simple, nor as black and white as you'd like it to be.

TB has always stated that he's prepared to fund the club and to ensure it has a bright future by the club becoming sustainable during his tenure. That means if he's no longer here the club survives and can maintain its status.

So, is the club sustainable today? Yes, sort of. It could survive if TB left tomorrow. However the club would be on a bit of a knife edge and lets say a global pandemic occurred then we'd be in trouble. Or lets say we need to recruit 8 new players in the January window, then we couldn't do that. Or lets say we had a large VAT bill to pay, could we do that?

The point I'm making is that yes, Club Doncaster is capable of being sustainable today, but without TB it would be an uncomfortable and less ambitious DRFC.

[silent majority]

I was being facetious yes.

Having said that, I would nevertheless still ask why you would give someone shares that are worthless?

When given to an employee as one poster has suggested they do still tend to have value as a reward or bonus or in some form of salary sacrifice arrangement. It could be in return for a job well done for example. Hopefully that isn't the case here. Either way though, they tend to have value either through being able to be sold on or through conveying some form of dividend or a right to payment on a sale of the Company.

I agree the VSCs shares in the subsidiary DRFC will be worth nothing. They probably will have little to no voting rights and most definitely won't have a right to a dividend.  They're a token gesture. They represent 100k shares out of a total share capital of in excess of 33 million shares....in the subsidiary company. As you say, utterly worthless.

However I'm talking about the 96 million shares that GB and DB EACH hold in the topco (Club Doncaster) that actually owns and controls DRFC. Their respective 96 million shares each is the exact same amount of shares as held by TB.

Please could you explain to me how a football club works Silent Majority?

Our shares are not in a subsidiary company, and that token gesture cost the VSC in excess of £100,000.

Three points from Silent Majority's replies:

1. Doncaster Rovers Limited owns the football club assets. Sitting above that, Club Doncaster Limited owns 98.424% of the shares in Doncaster Rovers Limited and exercises absolute control over Doncaster Rovers Limited. I would say that is indeed a subsidiary and Club Doncaster is the Holding Company.  The VSC holds a shareholding equivalent to 0.32% of the issued share capital in Doncaster Rovers Limited. Doncaster Rugby League Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Club Doncaster. Doncaster Rovers Limited is a 98.424% owned subsidiary of Club Doncaster. Club Doncaster effectively owns and controls them both.

2. I remember the much publicised "memorandum of understanding" to which you refer. I'm sure you'll correct me if i'm wrong here but it's not legally binding though is it? If they wanted real power to attach the shares given to the VSC, they could have simply issued the VSC with one share (a "golden share" as it is sometimes called) that had certain rights of veto or enhanced decision making powers. They didn't do that. If Club Doncaster being the holders of 98.4% of the Shares in Doncaster Rovers wanted to take a certain course of action that the VSC disagreed with, what ability the VSC has to alter that? What magic rights does that 0.32% confer? I'm genuinely interested to know. I suspect the answer with be nothing. We all know that £100k of shares wont be able to be sold or monetised in any way. So what rights to they actually confer to the VSC? There are no different rights attached to the shares in issue according to Companies House however i'd presume there is a separate Shareholders Agreement is in existence that gives the VSC some teeth. Without it i struggle to see where any value or influence attaches to those 107,000 shares held by thh VSC.

3. On the one hand you strive to defenfd the value of the 107,000 (0.32% of the whole) shares held by the VSC in a subsidiary of Club Doncaster and cite the £100,000 paid. Conversely, you suggest the 96 million shares held by Gavin Baldwin and David Blunt in the holding company that has absolute control over both Doncaster Rovers Limited and Doncaster Rugby League Limited are worthless. Which is it to be?

Point 2.

No its not legally binding, but it was a serious statement of intent and one which the club has so far committed itself to and continues to do so. As regards a Golden Share, I haven't seen that in football in this country yet, but the Fan Led Review takes care of that and its one of the key recommendations. When it does happen the VSC will be the guardian of that Golden Share.

Point 3.

I'm not sure what your trying to say here as I'm not 'striving to defend' anything. You called it a a token gesture, I was just pointing out that it cost £100k or more, and at the time we handed the money over to JR it was one of the small lifelines he needed. DB also handed over a few million for his shareholding, but as we all know individual share holdings in a football club like ours are pretty much worthless.

[steve@dcfd]

Terry is not going to be involved for that much longer. The guy is 80 this year. He won’t need this hassle at his age. We’ve got to get soon to a stage where we are relatively sustainable. This gives us some stability for when he is not involved, and potentially then make us a more attractive option for external investment that might come. To get there we either have to cut outgoings or increase incomings. We have to choose one of them.

We're already at that point.

So TB is no longer putting funds into the club and the funds for the club are coming from Club Doncaster ???

It's not that simple, nor as black and white as you'd like it to be.

TB has always stated that he's prepared to fund the club and to ensure it has a bright future by the club becoming sustainable during his tenure. That means if he's no longer here the club survives and can maintain its status.

So, is the club sustainable today? Yes, sort of. It could survive if TB left tomorrow. However the club would be on a bit of a knife edge and lets say a global pandemic occurred then we'd be in trouble. Or lets say we need to recruit 8 new players in the January window, then we couldn't do that. Or lets say we had a large VAT bill to pay, could we do that?

The point I'm making is that yes, Club Doncaster is capable of being sustainable today, but without TB it would be an uncomfortable and less ambitious DRFC.

I understand now Thankyou

[Bessie Red]

Terry is not going to be involved for that much longer. The guy is 80 this year. He won’t need this hassle at his age. We’ve got to get soon to a stage where we are relatively sustainable. This gives us some stability for when he is not involved, and potentially then make us a more attractive option for external investment that might come. To get there we either have to cut outgoings or increase incomings. We have to choose one of them.

We're already at that point.

So TB is no longer putting funds into the club and the funds for the club are coming from Club Doncaster ???

It's not that simple, nor as black and white as you'd like it to be.

TB has always stated that he's prepared to fund the club and to ensure it has a bright future by the club becoming sustainable during his tenure. That means if he's no longer here the club survives and can maintain its status.

So, is the club sustainable today? Yes, sort of. It could survive if TB left tomorrow. However the club would be on a bit of a knife edge and lets say a global pandemic occurred then we'd be in trouble. Or lets say we need to recruit 8 new players in the January window, then we couldn't do that. Or lets say we had a large VAT bill to pay, could we do that?

The point I'm making is that yes, Club Doncaster is capable of being sustainable today, but without TB it would be an uncomfortable and less ambitious DRFC.

I would imagine that future investors would be easier to attract due to the current position we are in financially ie "Club Doncaster model" in the event that TB is no longer involved

[sedwardsdrfc]

Basically DRFC can live pay cheque to pay cheque without TB. Other clubs live in their overdrafts (owners charity) and when that overdraft gets cancelled they drop fast.

[Batleyred]

It beggars belief people can not see he's setting us up for that extra investment and a secure future. Yes things have gone wrong of late but hopefully we can get back on track. I'm very impressed by new assiant manager role, Copps
Role, new coaches, new head of sports science. They know what's needed and are acting on it.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

S_M

One thing that's intrigued me and I've never pushed for an answer.

In terms of setting the budget, what streams of income are taken into account  to determine the budget for the forthcoming season?

1. Projected ST sales and match ticket sales plus car parking, lottery, shirt sales etc., etc?
2. A Proportion of Club Doncaster income from non football related activities?
3. Owners contribution?
4. EFL solidarity payments etc?

Appreciate there may not be a simple answer to this one but as a guide, in percentage terms, what are the contributions of each of the above?

Or, is the budget set on projected income with the owners (TB) picking up the loss at the end of each season?

Or, is it worked out using the total wage limit as % of total turnover?

This is not a loaded question btw, but might be helpful as a guide.

[Janso]

Terry is not going to be involved for that much longer. The guy is 80 this year. He won’t need this hassle at his age. We’ve got to get soon to a stage where we are relatively sustainable. This gives us some stability for when he is not involved, and potentially then make us a more attractive option for external investment that might come. To get there we either have to cut outgoings or increase incomings. We have to choose one of them.

We're already at that point.

So TB is no longer putting funds into the club and the funds for the club are coming from Club Doncaster ???

It's not that simple, nor as black and white as you'd like it to be.

TB has always stated that he's prepared to fund the club and to ensure it has a bright future by the club becoming sustainable during his tenure. That means if he's no longer here the club survives and can maintain its status.

So, is the club sustainable today? Yes, sort of. It could survive if TB left tomorrow. However the club would be on a bit of a knife edge and lets say a global pandemic occurred then we'd be in trouble. Or lets say we need to recruit 8 new players in the January window, then we couldn't do that. Or lets say we had a large VAT bill to pay, could we do that?

The point I'm making is that yes, Club Doncaster is capable of being sustainable today, but without TB it would be an uncomfortable and less ambitious DRFC.

I would imagine that future investors would be easier to attract due to the current position we are in financially ie "Club Doncaster model" in the event that TB is no longer involved

Nah, some bloke behind me says no one will ever want to buy into Club Doncaster cos they'd not want the rugby club too so we're never going to get new owners.

Then again this same bloke also said if the Dons got into the Super League the owners would turn the Keepmoat blue instead.

[RugbyRover]

All this talk of future investments all well and good but I have a feeling the club will be going down a different path.

It wouldn't surprise me if when the inevitable happens and TB pops his clogs, his family will leave the club to some sort of Community Trust which will use the income generated from Club Doncaster to fund itself.

[bellevuebulgar]

The purchase of shares in the club was merely a mechanism of giving funds to the club. Money raised from VSC subscriptions, the Coin Trail and various bucket collections were all channeled in that way.

[silent majority]

S_M

One thing that's intrigued me and I've never pushed for an answer.

In terms of setting the budget, what streams of income are taken into account  to determine the budget for the forthcoming season?

1. Projected ST sales and match ticket sales plus car parking, lottery, shirt sales etc., etc?
2. A Proportion of Club Doncaster income from non football related activities?
3. Owners contribution?
4. EFL solidarity payments etc?

Appreciate there may not be a simple answer to this one but as a guide, in percentage terms, what are the contributions of each of the above?

Or, is the budget set on projected income with the owners (TB) picking up the loss at the end of each season?

Or, is it worked out using the total wage limit as % of total turnover?

This is not a loaded question btw, but might be helpful as a guide.

Hi Baz,

Well, they use all those streams but plenty of others too.

In simple terms we, as a club, have a different make up of income compared to others at our level, but essentially it breaks down into 'thirds'. Solidarity payments are about a third of our income, ticket sales another third with commercial activities making up the final third. In that respect we look more like an EPL club than an EFL club.

Its our commercial activities that separate us from other clubs around us, we're just so much better at it than others. A lot of that is because of the lease on the stadium, we can squeeze it to make more money, i.e. rental income from office space, car boot sales, concerts etc.

As for setting the budget, that's easy, take all the income, subtract the cost of the operation and what you have left is the budget.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

S_M

One thing that's intrigued me and I've never pushed for an answer.

In terms of setting the budget, what streams of income are taken into account  to determine the budget for the forthcoming season?

1. Projected ST sales and match ticket sales plus car parking, lottery, shirt sales etc., etc?
2. A Proportion of Club Doncaster income from non football related activities?
3. Owners contribution?
4. EFL solidarity payments etc?

Appreciate there may not be a simple answer to this one but as a guide, in percentage terms, what are the contributions of each of the above?

Or, is the budget set on projected income with the owners (TB) picking up the loss at the end of each season?

Or, is it worked out using the total wage limit as % of total turnover?

This is not a loaded question btw, but might be helpful as a guide.

Hi Baz,

Well, they use all those streams but plenty of others too.

In simple terms we, as a club, have a different make up of income compared to others at our level, but essentially it breaks down into 'thirds'. Solidarity payments are about a third of our income, ticket sales another third with commercial activities making up the final third. In that respect we look more like an EPL club than an EFL club.

Its our commercial activities that separate us from other clubs around us, we're just so much better at it than others. A lot of that is because of the lease on the stadium, we can squeeze it to make more money, i.e. rental income from office space, car boot sales, concerts etc.

As for setting the budget, that's easy, take all the income, subtract the cost of the operation and what you have left is the budget.

Thanks S_M.

That certainly appears to indicate the club is in a healthy state and able to stand on our own two feet.

Where does the owners contribution come in?


Are they underwriting losses that may or may not accrue at the end of each financial year or a they actively contributing up front to the annual playing budget?

[silent majority]

S_M

One thing that's intrigued me and I've never pushed for an answer.

In terms of setting the budget, what streams of income are taken into account  to determine the budget for the forthcoming season?

1. Projected ST sales and match ticket sales plus car parking, lottery, shirt sales etc., etc?
2. A Proportion of Club Doncaster income from non football related activities?
3. Owners contribution?
4. EFL solidarity payments etc?

Appreciate there may not be a simple answer to this one but as a guide, in percentage terms, what are the contributions of each of the above?

Or, is the budget set on projected income with the owners (TB) picking up the loss at the end of each season?

Or, is it worked out using the total wage limit as % of total turnover?

This is not a loaded question btw, but might be helpful as a guide.

Hi Baz,

Well, they use all those streams but plenty of others too.

In simple terms we, as a club, have a different make up of income compared to others at our level, but essentially it breaks down into 'thirds'. Solidarity payments are about a third of our income, ticket sales another third with commercial activities making up the final third. In that respect we look more like an EPL club than an EFL club.

Its our commercial activities that separate us from other clubs around us, we're just so much better at it than others. A lot of that is because of the lease on the stadium, we can squeeze it to make more money, i.e. rental income from office space, car boot sales, concerts etc.

As for setting the budget, that's easy, take all the income, subtract the cost of the operation and what you have left is the budget.

Thanks S_M.

That certainly appears to indicate the club is in a healthy state and able to stand on our own two feet.

Where does the owners contribution come in?


Are they underwriting losses that may or may not accrue at the end of each financial year or a they actively contributing up front to the annual playing budget?

I like to think of their role as like an expensive insurance policy. They're there to fill in the gaps and smooth out the bumps.

The playing budget is set early on and then individual departments are targeted to meet certain financial criteria, Shaun of course is all about ticket revenue, Jon is there for commercial revenue etc. If all goes according to plan then no upfront money is needed, but a football season can have some very unpredictable moments!

So, yes we are in a very healthy state, just about all the debt accrued during the pandemic has been paid back apart from one reasonably small commitment that is being dealt with and has been worked into this seasons budget.

[Chris Black come back]

After the horror show of the last 18 months, being a good, solid and competitive League One side seems a very good place to be.

It does feel though that for us to get into the Championship again, it is either going to require an injection of cash over a few seasons, or a manager who can absolutely rinse everything and more out of a League One budget which feels top ten but lower end of that.

We appear to have a good steady state budget and finances for League One but nothing compared to maybe 6-8 sides in there now.

Noting of course we have been absolutely abject and deservedly are now in League Two, so the above is a challenge for another year, hopefully before too long.

[since-1969]

Could JR have run the club sustainably and successfully in a football capacity? That’s the holy grail. I think not.

Can the current owners? I don’t think so.

Is it possible? Very much so.

For the record, I deem success as constant over performing compared to the budget available.

Over performing compared to our budget .. Not so !!
We’ve had a reasonable budget but It’s not how much you spend , it’s who you spend it on . When ever we’ve paid a fee ie Ben Whiteman or just invested it’s the player John Marquis even Alfie May it’s shown a return .
An intelligent experience Manager and Board of Directors with ambition and a focus on the performance will always find away .

[roversdude]

Could JR have run the club sustainably and successfully in a football capacity? That’s the holy grail. I think not.

Can the current owners? I don’t think so.

Is it possible? Very much so.

For the record, I deem success as constant over performing compared to the budget available.

Over performing compared to our budget .. Not so !!
We’ve had a reasonable budget but It’s not how much you spend , it’s who you spend it on . When ever we’ve paid a fee ie Ben Whiteman or just invested it’s the player John Marquis even Alfie May it’s shown a return .
An intelligent experience Manager and Board of Directors with ambition and a focus on the performance will always find away .

Wow so at last you admit it’s not investment that’s the problem

[River Don]

For a club with a support base the size of Rovers getting into the Championship is a very tough ask. Realistically it would require either a very wealthy individual with lots of ambition to bankroll the club or an individual with lots of ambition and a cunning plan. That might see the club succeed for a while and then burn.

As it is I think the club has found its level, which is somewhere between L1 & L2. Which for me is fine.

Ultimately if we want Rovers to consistently compete at a higher level, then it's going to require a consistently bigger gate. What the club really needs then is for a couple of large employers to set up around the town. A new electric vehicle gigafactory or something like that.

[Chris Black come back]

Not words I ever thought I would say, but Rotherham United is probably about as good as it gets for us - a consistently strong League One side that can regularly make an appearance in the Championship.

Looking at their accounts for last season 2020/21 in the Championship - and that was a COVID disrupted season - there is a model there. That season their wage bill was £8m and their income from the central distribution (ie money received just for being in the Championship) was almost exactly the same. So they covered their wage bill with ‘free money’ before even accounting for their matchday income (zero in 2020/21 due to COVID but the previous season was £1.8m in League One) and commercial (£2m in both 2020/21 and 2019/20).

It is very unfortunate that Rovers stopped several years ago publishing similar information which nigh on every league club publishes, but given the Rotherham stadium size and similar unfashionability, I cannot believe we don’t get very similar matchday income or commercial income.

The better comparison is 2019/20 which was largely not disrupted by COVID and Rotherham were in League One like us. That season their wage bill was around £5.6m, while their central distribution was £2.6m, matchday income £1.7m and commercial income £2.2m. By comparison, that season our average gates were broadly comparable at 8,900 for Rotherham and 8,300 for us. So their wage bill (which looks significantly in excess of our wage bill for that season, I would guess) was easily covered by their income, and that is before the £2.1m they received that season from transfer income, which should be seen as a bonus.

Due to the total absence of transparency on our income and expenditure, it is very hard to see what Rovers receive and spend, but given the Rotherham books appear to show they are absolutely sustainable and have a healthy wage bill that with a good manager and model, allows them to compete at a level, that is realistic for us to aspire to.

[River Don]

Rotherham are certainly punching above their weight. I think they are going through something of a purple patch and will probably struggle to maintain it for too long.

At the moment they are doing something right, no doubt.

[roversdude]

Is there a parachute payment from the championship to league one ?

[tyke1962]

Is there a parachute payment from the championship to league one ?

There is Rovers , not a massive amount by any means .

Not too sure of the exact figure but it's over a million quid but less than £3m I believe .

[tyke1962]

Rotherham don't go for too much financially when in the championship .

I know it frustrates many Millers because a couple of times they were very close to staying up .

However when they do take the drop back in to league one they continue to be very competitive .

[Chris Black come back]

That’s not to say that Rotherham don’t have their problems either. Ladapo refused to sign a new deal I believe and left, presumably as he believed he could get a better deal elsewhere. Largely though I would imagine we have a very similar financial profile to Rotherham yet they are consistently better than us and clearly recruit better than us.

Without getting obsessed by this point, it is assumption being used, as several years ago Rovers stopped publishing information regarding our basic income and expenditure, which is at odds with most league clubs. A regrettable decision.

[tyke1962]

That’s not to say that Rotherham don’t have their problems either. Ladapo refused to sign a new deal I believe and left, presumably as he believed he could get a better deal elsewhere. Largely though I would imagine we have a very similar financial profile to Rotherham yet they are consistently better than us and clearly recruit better than us.

Without getting obsessed by this point, it is assumption being used, as several years ago Rovers stopped publishing information regarding our basic income and expenditure, which is at odds with most league clubs. A regrettable decision.

I think the biggest asset they have is stability Chris .

Paul Warne is at the heart of the stability .

Tony Stewart sets the budget within the resources they have and doesn't budge one inch on it .

Both Warne and Stewart receive massive criticism when they struggle in the championship from a fair proportion of the support but not everyone by any means .

Clearly something at some stage will have to give , either they stay up in the championship for a few seasons or they don't get promoted from league one at the first attempt .

I personally wouldn't be surprised to see them stay up next season especially if they can keep Smith at the club .

[Padge_DRFC]

Rotherham have been getting 3000 more home fans at games this season than us doesn't sound a lot but when it's 5k v 8k it's more than 50% increase.

[DearneValleyRover]

Rumour has it that Tony Stewart has found himself in the same position as JR did and will be reducing his funding, might be the reason Ladapo left

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Not words I ever thought I would say, but Rotherham United is probably about as good as it gets for us - a consistently strong League One side that can regularly make an appearance in the Championship.

Looking at their accounts for last season 2020/21 in the Championship - and that was a COVID disrupted season - there is a model there. That season their wage bill was £8m and their income from the central distribution (ie money received just for being in the Championship) was almost exactly the same. So they covered their wage bill with ‘free money’ before even accounting for their matchday income (zero in 2020/21 due to COVID but the previous season was £1.8m in League One) and commercial (£2m in both 2020/21 and 2019/20).

It is very unfortunate that Rovers stopped several years ago publishing similar information which nigh on every league club publishes, but given the Rotherham stadium size and similar unfashionability, I cannot believe we don’t get very similar matchday income or commercial income.

The better comparison is 2019/20 which was largely not disrupted by COVID and Rotherham were in League One like us. That season their wage bill was around £5.6m, while their central distribution was £2.6m, matchday income £1.7m and commercial income £2.2m. By comparison, that season our average gates were broadly comparable at 8,900 for Rotherham and 8,300 for us. So their wage bill (which looks significantly in excess of our wage bill for that season, I would guess) was easily covered by their income, and that is before the £2.1m they received that season from transfer income, which should be seen as a bonus.

Due to the total absence of transparency on our income and expenditure, it is very hard to see what Rovers receive and spend, but given the Rotherham books appear to show they are absolutely sustainable and have a healthy wage bill that with a good manager and model, allows them to compete at a level, that is realistic for us to aspire to.

Yes, not too dissimilar and there was a time not too long ago when both clubs were having strong seasons before things got curtailed and what turned out to be their fortune in getting promoted, was our misfortune of missing out.

Yes, they got relegated again but having that access to the additional funding in the Championship, providing , they used it wisely, which given they've been promoted again, suggests they did, means the two clubs are not poles apart.

As said above, they've had the stability of Warne to steer them through the promotions and relegation and who knows, this time they might stay more than one season.

The majority of Rotherham fans are realistic enough to know how tough it is in the Championship and a bet they wouldn't swap their promotions.

In addition, I bet every Sunderland fan celebrated just as hard yesterday as they did winning the odd Premiership game. It's all relative.

[Sprotyrover]

Rotherham Fan at work reckons they need a complete change of Squad to stay up

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Rotherham Fan at work reckons they need a complete change of Squad to stay up

And what do you think. Is that reasonable or realistic?

They may have a bit more change around as there's quite a few in their squad out of contract but, they're going to have to be smart rather than flashing much cash.