Venky’s v Indian Government (a) - 13/1/2025 - Re-Arranged Challenge Match

[Andy]

2 hours ago, 1864roverite said:

The level of debt is theirs so does it matter how much it is?

One things for certain, if the club is sold then venkys will take their debt with them

Well, hopefully - but that has always been my major concern with any potential sale of the club.

Are Venky’s going to just write off that amount of money?

If not, we’ll likely never have different owners (unless one of us wins the Euro Millions on a triple rollover week).

[1864roverite]

9 minutes ago, Andy said:

Well, hopefully - but that has always been my major concern with any potential sale of the club.

Are Venky’s going to just write off that amount of money?

If not, we’ll likely never have different owners (unless one of us wins the Euro Millions on a triple rollover week).

They will be left with no choice - continue to fund or sell up

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Fund us with bare minimum they can get away with.On life support.

[Upside Down]

All this club has ever been to them is an accounting tool to siphon off enough money to avoid paying tax.

This club has more than likely not cost them a penny.

For all the shit owners there are out there in football land, venkys are the only ones I can think of that deliberately relegated a club from the Premier League.

The only way this club will move forward is without them.

[broadsword]

"we will absolutely respect the jack walker legacy"

 

Christ almighty, what would they do if they decided to disrespect it?

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, Upside Down said:

All this club has ever been to them is an accounting tool to siphon off enough money to avoid paying tax.

This club has more than likely not cost them a penny.

 

Been saying this for years and i think a few things happening recently have added a bit of weight to it.

[RoverDom]

2 hours ago, Upside Down said:

All this club has ever been to them is an accounting tool to siphon off enough money to avoid paying tax.

This doesn't make sense though. They might pay less tax but they'd have less money overall. 

They flush 20m down the toilet each season, they get nothing from it, it's not like they've bought an asset and found a loophole to make it tax deductible. Its not like they've done an accounting tweak to make it look like they're loss making. They're losing cold hard cash down each year and getting nothing in return. 

Edited September 14, 2023 by RoverDom

[47er]

On 14/09/2023 at 00:46, 1864roverite said:

The level of debt is theirs so does it matter how much it is?

One things for certain, if the club is sold then venkys will take their debt with them

Yet when their £7M pound UK house purchase was rumbled by the Indian tax authorities----who had to pay for it?

Why? In what sense was it the fault of Blackburn Rovers?

[glen9mullan]

I read something the other day which basically said,

In a 100 years we will all be dead.

How many of us genuinely remember our great grandparents?

Our graves will probably be overgrown,  and in most cases unvisited.

There won't really be pictures of us hanging on the walls.

Conversations about us will be minimal if not at all.

It made me think of Rovers and 12/13 years of Venkys.

So many have walked away and don't even look at the results.

We have a large % of supporters now who only know life under Venkys, they don't remember the Jack Walker days or those days before Jack.

They don't understand the animosity towards Venkys and would see the good if they sold the ground.

They don't know the history of the corruption which Venkys were certainly not innocent by standers, christ they gave the most hated Manager in the clubs history a new contract despite thousands protesting for his removal.

They, and they alone removed each employee who had an ounce of spirit or skill to run our club.

Even today they have their man on the ground who brokered the deal with Anderson to buy the club, he is so proud of this, that he lists this as one of his LinkedIn achievements.

This ownership has been toxic from day one, continues to be so.

We have chancers in the boardroom who are perfect for them as they don't rock the boat.

Somewhere along this journey we have lost the fight and continue to be poked in the eye by the incompetent,  and those who don't give one flying **** about our town, our club,  its heritage or its history.

Blackburn Rovers will never truly be in safe waters whilst they remain, and all efforts for their exit along with their cronies in the board room must at some point start, or things will get much worse.

[tomphil]

26 minutes ago, RoverDom said:

This doesn't make sense though. They might pay less tax but they'd have less money overall. 

They flush 20m down the toilet each season, they get nothing from it, it's not like they've bought an asset and found a loophole to make it tax deductible. Its not like they've done an accounting tweak to make it look like they're loss making. They're losing cold hard cash down each year and getting nothing in return. 

From the big turnover and profit the VH group makes and given it isn't a listed company we've no idea how the accounting looks for it.

You'd have to be in cuckoo land to think these people would just throw that amount away for no reason unless there was at least an ounce of method in their madness.

[Upside Down]

1 hour ago, RoverDom said:

This doesn't make sense though. They might pay less tax but they'd have less money overall. 

They flush 20m down the toilet each season, they get nothing from it, it's not like they've bought an asset and found a loophole to make it tax deductible. Its not like they've done an accounting tweak to make it look like they're loss making. They're losing cold hard cash down each year and getting nothing in return. 

If the tax bill is bigger than the losses to cover Rovers expenditure then they have made money from that.

A football club is a brilliant way to do this as they continually lose money year on year in a way that nobody would blink an eye. Really shows how mental this game has become. 

Not sure why people find this so hard to comprehend really. Corporations do this sort of thing all the time.

This entire thread is because they have been caught trying to cheat the tax rules when buying a house.

Yes yes I know, conspiracy theories, crazy talk etc etc etc...

[Upside Down]

1 hour ago, glen9mullan said:

I read something the other day which basically said,

In a 100 years we will all be dead.

How many of us genuinely remember our great grandparents?

Our graves will probably be overgrown,  and in most cases unvisited.

There won't really be pictures of us hanging on the walls.

Conversations about us will be minimal if not at all.

It made me think of Rovers and 12/13 years of Venkys.

So many have walked away and don't even look at the results.

We have a large % of supporters now who only know life under Venkys, they don't remember the Jack Walker days or those days before Jack.

They don't understand the animosity towards Venkys and would see the good if they sold the ground.

They don't know the history of the corruption which Venkys were certainly not innocent by standers, christ they gave the most hated Manager in the clubs history a new contract despite thousands protesting for his removal.

They, and they alone removed each employee who had an ounce of spirit or skill to run our club.

Even today they have their man on the ground who brokered the deal with Anderson to buy the club, he is so proud of this, that he lists this as one of his LinkedIn achievements.

This ownership has been toxic from day one, continues to be so.

We have chancers in the boardroom who are perfect for them as they don't rock the boat.

Somewhere along this journey we have lost the fight and continue to be poked in the eye by the incompetent,  and those who don't give one flying **** about our town, our club,  its heritage or its history.

Blackburn Rovers will never truly be in safe waters whilst they remain, and all efforts for their exit along with their cronies in the board room must at some point start, or things will get much worse.

To be fair, I wasn't around for World War Two but that's no excuse for not knowing about it.

Ignorance is not an excuse for being a moron.

[RoverDom]

4 hours ago, Upside Down said:

If the tax bill is bigger than the losses to cover Rovers expenditure then they have made money from that.

A football club is a brilliant way to do this as they continually lose money year on year in a way that nobody would blink an eye. Really shows how mental this game has become. 

Not sure why people find this so hard to comprehend really. Corporations do this sort of thing all the time.

This entire thread is because they have been caught trying to cheat the tax rules when buying a house.

Yes yes I know, conspiracy theories, crazy talk etc etc etc...

I can't get my head round it. 

Imagine £100m profit and 20% tax would leave £80m profit for the venkys. Then chuck in £20m of losses would be £80m of profit at 20% would equal £16m after tax profit. So they've spent £20m to save £4m in tax. 

I know corporations do it all the time but they're usually getting something out of it, so they'd spend the £20m to reduce the tax bill but they'd have £20m worth of stuff. Or they make accounting adjustments to make it look like they're loss making. 

I'm not accusing you of conspiracy theories cos I suck at Tax but you'll definitely need to spell it out for me with some hypothetical numbers cos I just don't get it. 

[Upside Down]

3 hours ago, RoverDom said:

I can't get my head round it. 

Imagine £100m profit and 20% tax would leave £80m profit for the venkys. Then chuck in £20m of losses would be £80m of profit at 20% would equal £16m after tax profit. So they've spent £20m to save £4m in tax. 

I know corporations do it all the time but they're usually getting something out of it, so they'd spend the £20m to reduce the tax bill but they'd have £20m worth of stuff. Or they make accounting adjustments to make it look like they're loss making. 

I'm not accusing you of conspiracy theories cos I suck at Tax but you'll definitely need to spell it out for me with some hypothetical numbers cos I just don't get it. 

You just spelled it out yourself.

These are the people who bought a house through the company and tried to claim it was a chicken coup to claim it as an expense.

Spending 20million to save paying an extra 4million.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Upside Down

[AllRoverAsia]

9 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

I read something the other day which basically said,

In a 100 years we will all be dead.

How many of us genuinely remember our great grandparents?

Our graves will probably be overgrown,  and in most cases unvisited.

There won't really be pictures of us hanging on the walls.

Conversations about us will be minimal if not at all.

It made me think of Rovers and 12/13 years of Venkys.

So many have walked away and don't even look at the results.

We have a large % of supporters now who only know life under Venkys, they don't remember the Jack Walker days or those days before Jack.

They don't understand the animosity towards Venkys and would see the good if they sold the ground.

They don't know the history of the corruption which Venkys were certainly not innocent by standers, christ they gave the most hated Manager in the clubs history a new contract despite thousands protesting for his removal.

They, and they alone removed each employee who had an ounce of spirit or skill to run our club.

Even today they have their man on the ground who brokered the deal with Anderson to buy the club, he is so proud of this, that he lists this as one of his LinkedIn achievements.

This ownership has been toxic from day one, continues to be so.

We have chancers in the boardroom who are perfect for them as they don't rock the boat.

Somewhere along this journey we have lost the fight and continue to be poked in the eye by the incompetent,  and those who don't give one flying **** about our town, our club,  its heritage or its history.

Blackburn Rovers will never truly be in safe waters whilst they remain, and all efforts for their exit along with their cronies in the board room must at some point start, or things will get much worse.

It is just not possible to fight an opponent who will not engage and who own and control the asset in question and everyone who operates it.

We can vent as much as we like but until the Venkys engage or get fed up we are what we are and the rats like Coar, who should but doesn't know better get their chance to spread their propaganda.

Fans need now to be approaching their mid 20s to really remember us pre Venkys.

[RoverDom]

41 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

You just spelled it out yourself.

These are the people who bought a house through the company and tried to claim it was a chicken coup to claim it as an expense.

Spending 20million to save paying an extra 4million.

But that means they're £16m down overall. People don't avoid paying tax cos they don't like tax, they do it to get more money / stuff. 

I could avoid paying tax it I went part time and halved my salary but it makes no sense to do that because I'd have less money. I could avoid tax by salary sacrificing into my pension, that makes sense cos I get a stronger pension as a result. 

Edited September 15, 2023 by RoverDom

[Leonard Venkhater]

13 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

I read something the other day which basically said,

In a 100 years we will all be dead.

How many of us genuinely remember our great grandparents?

Our graves will probably be overgrown,  and in most cases unvisited.

There won't really be pictures of us hanging on the walls.

Conversations about us will be minimal if not at all.

It made me think of Rovers and 12/13 years of Venkys.

So many have walked away and don't even look at the results.

We have a large % of supporters now who only know life under Venkys, they don't remember the Jack Walker days or those days before Jack.

They don't understand the animosity towards Venkys and would see the good if they sold the ground.

They don't know the history of the corruption which Venkys were certainly not innocent by standers, christ they gave the most hated Manager in the clubs history a new contract despite thousands protesting for his removal.

They, and they alone removed each employee who had an ounce of spirit or skill to run our club.

Even today they have their man on the ground who brokered the deal with Anderson to buy the club, he is so proud of this, that he lists this as one of his LinkedIn achievements.

This ownership has been toxic from day one, continues to be so.

We have chancers in the boardroom who are perfect for them as they don't rock the boat.

Somewhere along this journey we have lost the fight and continue to be poked in the eye by the incompetent,  and those who don't give one flying **** about our town, our club,  its heritage or its history.

Blackburn Rovers will never truly be in safe waters whilst they remain, and all efforts for their exit along with their cronies in the board room must at some point start, or things will get much worse.

Lol. Are you Sylvia Plath in disguise?

" Everything people did seemed so silly because they only died in the end.."

[Andy]

8 hours ago, Upside Down said:

You just spelled it out yourself.

These are the people who bought a house through the company and tried to claim it was a chicken coup to claim it as an expense.

Spending 20million to save paying an extra 4million.

So throwing £16m in the bin for no reason or benefit?

Sorry, not seeing the logic behind this one.

[RoverDom]

28 minutes ago, Andy said:

So throwing £16m in the bin for no reason or benefit?

Sorry, not seeing the logic behind this one.

As far as tax avoidance goes its very aggressive and horrendously inefficient 

[Upside Down]

4 hours ago, RoverDom said:

As far as tax avoidance goes its very aggressive and horrendously inefficient 

 

4 hours ago, Andy said:

So throwing £16m in the bin for no reason or benefit?

Sorry, not seeing the logic behind this one.

So you've not grasped the concept of tax brackets then.

For example 65-40% = 39

55-25% = 41.25

 

Obviously it isn’t as simple as this and none of us know how they are doing it. The only person who could possibly kbow how the finances work across whole venkys business would be the CFO.

One of the only real consistencies overthe last 13 years have been the losses. When they threaten to change in either direction, action is taken. Lose too much it will cost money. Promotion and a sudden injection of 200 million also causes problems as you now can't write off 20 million in losses.

Remember, these people who are supposedly billionaires bought a house for 7 million, crumbs to them according to some, and ran it through the company books as a tax dodge.

Now they are having assets siezed because of this and they have had to reign in the spending on their other financial write off. Supposedly. 

[RoverDom]

39 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

 

So you've not grasped the concept of tax brackets then.

For example 65-40% = 39

55-25% = 41.25

 

Obviously it isn’t as simple as this and none of us know how they are doing it. The only person who could possibly kbow how the finances work across whole venkys business would be the CFO.

One of the only real consistencies overthe last 13 years have been the losses. When they threaten to change in either direction, action is taken. Lose too much it will cost money. Promotion and a sudden injection of 200 million also causes problems as you now can't write off 20 million in losses.

Remember, these people who are supposedly billionaires bought a house for 7 million, crumbs to them according to some, and ran it through the company books as a tax dodge.

Now they are having assets siezed because of this and they have had to reign in the spending on their other financial write off. Supposedly. 

That's not how tax brackets work. Take the UK for example. 

If you earn 12.5k you pay zero income tax 

If you earn 22.5k you pay 20% on the 10k over 12.5k

If you earn 60k you pay 0% on the first 12.5k 20% on 12.5 - 50k and 40% on the final 10k. You don't pay 40% on the full 60k. If you sum it all up the tax you pay on 60k is like 19% in total. 

Your logic would say that if I earn 60k I would be paying 24k in tax taking home 36k and i would be better off losing £10k so I'd only pay £10k in tax and take home £40k.

 

I have no doubt venkys engage in dodgy dealings in order to avoid paying tax. The annual funding of a football club is not one of them. For starters it doesn't even work mathematically. Even if it did work, there's far easier ways to lose money than to buy a football club and conspire to relegate it and play a game of spin the plates in order to keep them in the second tier. 

"Promotion and a sudden injection of 200 million also causes problems as you now can't write off 20 million in losses."

You absolutely could. If we had £200m in revenue, they could sanction spend of £220m. Just because we have revenue doesn't mean we have to run at a profit. Its not unusual for PL teams to run at a loss it wouldn't arose suspicion. 

Edited September 15, 2023 by RoverDom

[Upside Down]

6 minutes ago, RoverDom said:

That's not how tax brackets work. Take the UK for example. 

If you earn 12.5k you pay zero income tax 

If you earn 22.5k you pay 20% on the 10k over 12.5k

If you earn 60k you pay 0% on the first 12.5k 20% on 12.5 - 50k and 40% on the final 10k. You don't pay 40% on the full 60k. If you sum it all up the tax you pay on 60k is like 19% in total. 

Your logic would say that if I earn 60k I would be paying 24k in tax taking home 36k and i would be better off losing £10k so I'd only pay £10k in tax and take home £40k.

 

I have no doubt venkys engage in dodgy dealings in order to avoid paying tax. The annual funding of a football club is not one of them. For starters it doesn't even work mathematically. Even if it did work, there's far easier ways to lose money than to buy a football club and conspire to relegate it and play a game of spin the plates in order to keep them in the second tier. 

"Promotion and a sudden injection of 200 million also causes problems as you now can't write off 20 million in losses."

You absolutely could. If we had £200m in revenue, they could sanction spend of £220m. Just because we have revenue doesn't mean we have to run at a profit. Its not unusual for PL teams to run at a loss it wouldn't arose suspicion. 

I'll reiterate the point that only the venkys CFO actually knows how it all goes together.

You have also not said anything regarding the house purchase.

Large companies make losses all over the place to write off tax.

When you're turning over massive amounts each year, an asset that regularly loses 10-20million is a great tool for balancing the books.

Please try and see the bigger picture here.

[RoverDom]

18 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

I'll reiterate the point that only the venkys CFO actually knows how it all goes together.

So essentially you don't know and have assumed the venkys own us for a tax dodge based on very flawed logic.

 

19 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

You have also not said anything regarding the house purchase

Cos I wasn't disputing that point. But that's an example of an actual tax dodge- buy a 7m asset, claim it as a business expense to save £Xm in tax. End result is you pay less tax and have a £7m asset. 

 

21 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

Large companies make losses all over the place to write off tax

No they don't they either a) make it look like they're making a loss - massage income into a future period, over state expenditure etc (they've not actually lost money here) b) buy a load of tax deductible stuff to reduce their profits (they've lost money but gained stuff) 

What they don't do is lose actual money and gain no stuff (on purpose)

25 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

When you're turning over massive amounts each year, an asset that regularly loses 10-20million is a great tool for balancing the books.

Sharing group losses is beneficial. Creating losses for no gain is not

 

26 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

Please try and see the bigger picture here.

Please gain some basic knowledge of tax and accounting. 

[Upside Down]

1 hour ago, RoverDom said:

So essentially you don't know and have assumed the venkys own us for a tax dodge based on very flawed logic.

 

NONE of us know. That's the point.

What is your logic, if there is any, behind your assumptions?

1 hour ago, RoverDom said:

Cos I wasn't disputing that point. But that's an example of an actual tax dodge- buy a 7m asset, claim it as a business expense to save £Xm in tax. End result is you pay less tax and have a £7m asset.

 

So a multi million pound business is not an asset then?

1 hour ago, RoverDom said:

No they don't they either a) make it look like they're making a loss - massage income into a future period, over state expenditure etc (they've not actually lost money here) b) buy a load of tax deductible stuff to reduce their profits (they've lost money but gained stuff) 

What they don't do is lose actual money and gain no stuff (on purpose)

 

They absolutely do. They rent business space, lease vehicles, machinery etc, all thing they can afford to buy but choose to lease as it can be classed as an expense. When they need to they will absolutely find ways to write money off if it is beneficial.

 

It does make me laugh that people who just think they throw 15million at year away for absolutely no reason are so certain that they are right.

I don't know what the true reasons are, none of us do.

 

Edit: I'll just add that when I say tax I'm using that term very loosely. I would hazard a guess that you don't end up a billionaire in Pune without having to deal with organised crime or the like in some way or another.

This is what I mean by the bigger picture.

Getting obsessed with personal income tax regulations is unbelievably short sighted when talking about a multi national corporation.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Upside Down

[RoverDom]

9 hours ago, Upside Down said:

What is your logic, if there is any, behind your assumptions

My logic is if you spend 20m to save  4m in tax you've lost 16m which gives you no advantage whatsoever given they don't then have 20m worth of assets as a result of expenditure. 

 

9 hours ago, Upside Down said:

So a multi million pound business is not an asset then?

It is. But they're not increasing the value of that asset by pumping 20m into it per season. 

 

9 hours ago, Upside Down said:

They rent business space, lease vehicles, machinery etc, all thing they can afford to buy but choose to lease as it can be classed as an expense

Whether you rent or buy an asset you spread the cost over many years rather than take the hit all in one go. Unless you do cash accounting which the venkys most definitely won't given their size. 

But ignoring that bit. If you buy or lease a machine, at the end of the day you have a machine. The descion to buy or lease will depend on a multitude of factors, one of which will of course be tax efficiency. 

9 hours ago, Upside Down said:

It does make me laugh that people who just think they throw 15million at year away for absolutely no reason are so certain that they are right.

I don't know what the true reasons are, none of us do.

Of course I don't know what their reasoning is for continuing to own is or the thought process behind their strategy (or lack of). What I'm certain is that you're not on the right path. No textbook, no business class, not even a shady get rich quick scheme would say "you know how to make more money? Flush £20m down the toilet each year, don't buy anything" 

 

9 hours ago, Upside Down said:

I'll just add that when I say tax I'm using that term very loosely.

Clearly 

9 hours ago, Upside Down said:

I would hazard a guess that you don't end up a billionaire in Pune without having to deal with organised crime or the like in some way or another.

No argument there, they're crooks.