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

[RevidgeBlue]

Will the Court not just say "You've had £22m in for Adam Wharton, you don't need to transfer any more money over" on March 12th now?

[lraC]

26 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Will the Court not just say "You've had £22m in for Adam Wharton, you don't need to transfer any more money over" on March 12th now?

I doubt they will even know.

[wilsdenrover]

31 minutes ago, lraC said:

I doubt they will even know.

I imagine ‘the other side’ will enlighten them.

[RevidgeBlue]

31 minutes ago, lraC said:

I doubt they will even know.

Hmmmm...they seemed to be interested enough in the first place to stipulate that any funds had to be used for running costs only and not transfer fees.

Hope you're right.

[wilsdenrover]

Just now, RevidgeBlue said:

Hmmmm...they seemed to be interested enough in the first place to stipulate that any funds had to be used for running costs only and not transfer fees.

Hope you're right.

They’re having to go to court because the Directorate Of Enforcement don’t want them to be able to send funds.

I can’t see how they (the DoE) don’t ask the court the same question you posed earlier.

[tomphil]

Remarkable set of coincidences, again.

[Rogerb]

Strongly suspect the 12th march court hearing won't happen now if Adam's transfer goes through particularly bearing in mind Venkys have to place an equivalent sum in a bond for any funds sent over. They will just use the transfer monies to fund the club for the next nine months.

[wilsdenrover]

7 minutes ago, Rogerb said:

Strongly suspect the 12th march court hearing won't happen now if Adam's transfer goes through particularly bearing in mind Venkys have to place an equivalent sum in a bond for any funds sent over. They will just use the transfer monies to fund the club for the next nine months.

I think they’ll still go to court as…

The court say yes - SW will be able to say  (as the club statement put it) ‘the owners continue to fully support the club’

The court say no - SW will be able to say ‘the owners want to continue supporting the club but are not being allowed to do so’

 

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, wilsdenrover said:

I think they’ll still go to court as…

The court say yes - SW will be able to say  (as the club statement put it) ‘the owners continue to fully support the club’

The court say no - SW will be able to say ‘the owners want to continue supporting the club but are not being allowed to do so’

 

You're giving him ideas now.

[wilsdenrover]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

You're giving him ideas now.

I know how an idiot thinks.

You may interpret that however you wish. 😄😄

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, Rogerb said:

Strongly suspect the 12th march court hearing won't happen now if Adam's transfer goes through particularly bearing in mind Venkys have to place an equivalent sum in a bond for any funds sent over. They will just use the transfer monies to fund the club for the next nine months.

But it would allow them to inject funds for transfers in line with FFP for the first time in forever !

Oh but wait.....they aren't allowed are they.

 

[phili]

1 minute ago, tomphil said:

But it would allow them to inject funds for transfers in line with FFP for the first time in forever !

Oh but wait.....they aren't allowed are they.

 

They won't ask the court to send funds until the Wharton money has been used.

What people are forgetting is the stipulation from the court that Venky's have to send through an equivalent amount to the enforcement agency to cover any fines that might be forthcoming. So if they are allowed to send £11m they had to place a matching £11m with the enforcement agency until everything is over.

The sudden cash injection from the sale of Wharton will have saved Venky's £22m to get us to the end of the season when they hope the investigation is over. When it is over they will receive the £13m they have deposited with the agency from the initial branch of funds sent through minus any fines.

[tomphil]

24 minutes ago, phili said:

They won't ask the court to send funds until the Wharton money has been used.

What people are forgetting is the stipulation from the court that Venky's have to send through an equivalent amount to the enforcement agency to cover any fines that might be forthcoming. So if they are allowed to send £11m they had to place a matching £11m with the enforcement agency until everything is over.

The sudden cash injection from the sale of Wharton will have saved Venky's £22m to get us to the end of the season when they hope the investigation is over. When it is over they will receive the £13m they have deposited with the agency from the initial branch of funds sent through minus any fines.

Point being they for once could inject funds for transfers in summer even if the running costs are covered due to it being ok on the balance sheet for FFP for the firt time in years.

However in the highly unlikely event they ever intended to do that they can't unless they get court clearance to invest in the team which won't happen.

Yet another remarkable set of coincidences when we just happen to flog a 20 million player and as a result of those coincidences they will never move this club forward even when FFP - a recurring excuse - actually allows it.

The summer will at best be spent looking for 2 or 3 500k signings instead of just 1, guys like Pickering, Markanday and O'Conner as that is now the 'model'.

[RevidgeBlue]

31 minutes ago, phili said:

They won't ask the court to send funds until the Wharton money has been used.

What people are forgetting is the stipulation from the court that Venky's have to send through an equivalent amount to the enforcement agency to cover any fines that might be forthcoming. So if they are allowed to send £11m they had to place a matching £11m with the enforcement agency until everything is over.

The sudden cash injection from the sale of Wharton will have saved Venky's £22m to get us to the end of the season when they hope the investigation is over. When it is over they will receive the £13m they have deposited with the agency from the initial branch of funds sent through minus any fines.

Very Interesting and the best insight I've seen into this situation.  Thank you.

So basically confirming the vast majority of the Wharton fee will just disappear in running costs.

Is this hope the investigation will be over at the end of the season well founded or not, or do we have no idea?

[G Somerset Rover]

So as suspected, we’re selling Wharton, simply because we have to. Not because we think we can get more in the summer, or for what’s best for Adam. 

No surprises there.

[broadsword]

23 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Very Interesting and the best insight I've seen into this situation.  Thank you.

So basically confirming the vast majority of the Wharton fee will just disappear in running costs.

Is this hope the investigation will be over at the end of the season well founded or not, or do we have no idea?

If the investigation is over in the summer, we'll never be free of these bastards 

[oldjamfan1]

47 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Very Interesting and the best insight I've seen into this situation.  Thank you.

So basically confirming the vast majority of the Wharton fee will just disappear in running costs.

Is this hope the investigation will be over at the end of the season well founded or not, or do we have no idea?

The way I see it, it isn't actually 'insight' its simply Phillip's opinion. Now it may or may not be an informed opinion but he doesn't have a 100% track record in being accurate. 

[RevidgeBlue]

45 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

The way I see it, it isn't actually 'insight' its simply Phillip's opinion. Now it may or may not be an informed opinion but he doesn't have a 100% track record in being accurate. 

Thanks for that reminder, I'm quite capable of making my mind up on which posters I think are worth listening to and which aren't!

His opinion/information is better than most imo.  If you don't agree that's absolutely fine.

[Gav]

3 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Very Interesting and the best insight I've seen into this situation.  Thank you.

So basically confirming the vast majority of the Wharton fee will just disappear in running costs.

You seem surprised at that Rev? Every other fee received has also disappeared in running costs! 

It makes it even more criminal that Diaz, Lenihan and Rothwell were allowed to walk for free. Fees for those players and Wharton stays, but oh no, they’re as thick as a bar top.

[Upside Down]

1 minute ago, Gav said:

You seem surprised at that Rev? Every other fee received has also disappeared in running costs! 

It makes it even more criminal that Diaz, Lenihan and Rothwell were allowed to walk for free. Fees for those players and Wharton stays, but oh no, they’re as thick as a bar top.

Hey mate, there's no need to be so disrespectful to bar tops.

[roverandout]

Venkys have fuck all rights to the Wharton money.  It was jack walker who set the academy up. I'd rather spend it all on an upgrade for his headstone than give it to those cnuts

[JBiz]

9 hours ago, Gav said:

You seem surprised at that Rev? Every other fee received has also disappeared in running costs! 

You mean wages above revenue. A wage is still spending money on players.

 

7 hours ago, roverandout said:

Venkys have fuck all rights to the Wharton money.  It was jack walker who set the academy up. I'd rather spend it all on an upgrade for his headstone than give it to those cnuts

They’ve put nearly 10x the amount they bought the club for. 
 

I really hate this ownership, but it confuses me as to why people don’t just stick to “factual” reasons to berate them such as;

1. Absence / ignorance of importance of quality leadership above the team and coaching staff

2. Lack of a genuine long term plan communicated with fans

3. Prices which contribute to a 1/2 empty ground every week

4. Using non football experienced “directors” in shadows or as a go between, to stick oars in on family whims.

 

There are hundreds of these with evidence to rationalise too, but we’re never going to help our argument through making stuff up about taking money out, black holes or mythical running costs.

 

Edited February 1 by JBiz

[roverandout]

1 minute ago, JBiz said:

You mean wages above revenue. A wage is still spending money on players.

 

They’ve put nearly 10x the amount they bought the club for. 
 

I really hate this ownership, but it confuses me as to why people don’t just stick to “factual” reasons to berate them such as;

1. Absence / ignorance of importance of quality leadership above the team and coaching staff

2. Lack of a genuine long term plan communicated with fans

3. Prices which contribute to a 1/2 empty ground every week

4. Using non football experienced “directors” in shadows or as a go between, to stick oars in on family whims.

 

There are hundreds of these with evidence to rationalise too, but we’re never going to help our argument through making stuff up about taking money out, black holes or mythical running costs.

 

But they're using the money from an academy that jack built to pay off debts and bills. They're not using their own money 

[JBiz]

4 minutes ago, roverandout said:

But they're using the money from an academy that jack built to pay off debts and bills. They're not using their own money 

Good. I know some might find it hard to understand and perhaps I’m talking bollox, but the less money they’re putting in, the less we’re relying on them, the closer we are to never hearing about the clowns in Pune ever again.

[roverandout]

36 minutes ago, JBiz said:

Good. I know some might find it hard to understand and perhaps I’m talking bollox, but the less money they’re putting in, the less we’re relying on them, the closer we are to never hearing about the clowns in Pune ever again.

Agree on that