Venky’s v Indian Government (a) - 5/8/25 - Perennially Re-Arranged Challenge Match

[RTM08]

6 minutes ago, ABBEY said:

noone will ..we've won a couple of games

Yup, I noticed on my lunch break someone has posted the delay on the facebook supporter's group and was getting absolutely hounded for "being negative" when our nee signings are doing so well.

The vast majority won't react until the club is already gone.

[K-Hod]

22 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Organisations like the Trust and Fans Forum absolutely have to step up now and not let Waggott get away with any more crap whatsoever along the "This doesn't affect our day to day operations" line.

Obviously it does. Over the last 12 months we've been selling anything of any value, scuppering high value incoming deals and not reinvesting in the team whereas before these particular financial difficulties the owners were (commendably imo) quite happy to risk the likes of  Rothwell and Brereton walk for nothing in the hope that by keeping them they'd fire us to promotion.

Oh aye, I wonder if California Rover still thinks they're the best owners in football..... (tongue firmly in cheek, don't fret).

Suspect this will roll onto the next meeting (16/09), once we are absolutely certain that there has actually been an adjournment and people aren't treating a livestream as fact, first! 😀.

 

[TheFinalCountdown]

18 minutes ago, Moptop1 said:

So, when are the club going to release a statement? The fan groups now need to call a meeting asap to discuss.

Fan Groups over to you…

Waggott will be full scheme ahead on this one. Expect an impromptu meeting with hand-picked supporters to be held in the upcoming days.

 

 

[Theopinionatedone]

23 minutes ago, Moptop1 said:

So, when are the club going to release a statement? The fan groups now need to call a meeting asap to discuss.

Fan Groups over to you…

who will do precisely F all

[ruggles1995]

what an absolute stinker this is. 

End of the day though they CAN still fund us. Just means any new money needed on top of whatever's in the bank needs to be paid in double due to the guarantee. Lets not forget they can still fund us if they WISH (which of course means they wont).

Worse case scenario here is that we don't get sanctioned to spend anymore on new signings as they wont want to double the money for the guarantee, if they need to add more into the bank. Lets hope we can still get a few in. I fully expect us to max out the loan market either way which means another 4 in at least. We defo need minimum 4 more bodies in the door. 

I am still confident the lights will always be on, for whatever silly reason they still seem to want to. 

[OldEwoodBlue]

23 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Oh aye, I wonder if California Rover still thinks they're the best owners in football..... (tongue firmly in cheek, don't fret).

Suspect this will roll onto the next meeting (16/09), once we are absolutely certain that there has actually been an adjournment and people aren't treating a livestream as fact, first! 😀.

 

Bitchy 🤣

But true

[lraC]

5 minutes ago, ruggles1995 said:

what an absolute stinker this is. 

End of the day though they CAN still fund us. Just means any new money needed on top of whatever's in the bank needs to be paid in double due to the guarantee. Lets not forget they can still fund us if they WISH (which of course means they wont).

Worse case scenario here is that we don't get sanctioned to spend anymore on new signings as they wont want to double the money for the guarantee, if they need to add more into the bank. Lets hope we can still get a few in. I fully expect us to max out the loan market either way which means another 4 in at least. We defo need minimum 4 more bodies in the door. 

I am still confident the lights will always be on, for whatever silly reason they still seem to want to. 

I am assuming the no objection certificate would still be required.

Was that issued today?

For the guys on the trust, would you mind clarifying that point, if there is any dialogue with the club?

[Crimpshrine]

18 minutes ago, ruggles1995 said:

what an absolute stinker this is. 

End of the day though they CAN still fund us. Just means any new money needed on top of whatever's in the bank needs to be paid in double due to the guarantee. Lets not forget they can still fund us if they WISH (which of course means they wont).

Worse case scenario here is that we don't get sanctioned to spend anymore on new signings as they wont want to double the money for the guarantee, if they need to add more into the bank. Lets hope we can still get a few in. I fully expect us to max out the loan market either way which means another 4 in at least. We defo need minimum 4 more bodies in the door. 

I am still confident the lights will always be on, for whatever silly reason they still seem to want to. 

I don't believe they can fund us. The whole point of the court hearing is Venky's asking for permission to send funds.

The last hearing allowed them to send some funds with a bond but they have to go to court each time they want to send more.

No hearing no funds .

[lraC]

5 minutes ago, Crimpshrine said:

I don't believe they can fund us. The whole point of the court hearing is Venky's asking for permission to send funds.

The last hearing allowed them to send some funds with a bond but they have to go to court each time they want to send more.

No hearing no funds .

Agreed, hence a statement needed from the club and hopefully one that reflects the real situation and not one that appeases a few fans, who aren't prepared to question things. 

[Theopinionatedone]

1 minute ago, lraC said:

Agreed, hence a statement needed from the club and hopefully one that reflects the real situation and not one that appeases a few fans, who aren't prepared to question things. 

appeases a large section of fans haha

This is exactly what they'll do.

 

[ruggles1995]

12 minutes ago, Crimpshrine said:

I don't believe they can fund us. The whole point of the court hearing is Venky's asking for permission to send funds.

The last hearing allowed them to send some funds with a bond but they have to go to court each time they want to send more.

No hearing no funds .

ah I assumed it would carry on until the case happened?

 

Suppose nobody really knows the ins and outs.....

 

Lets hope its allowed then!

[roverblue]

Delayed as expected. As soon as they got the Sammy money the pressure was off.

I am sure they could get it seen to asap if they really wanted to with some pressure on the courts given the length and previous postponements. 

[roversfan99]

49 minutes ago, ruggles1995 said:

what an absolute stinker this is. 

End of the day though they CAN still fund us. Just means any new money needed on top of whatever's in the bank needs to be paid in double due to the guarantee. Lets not forget they can still fund us if they WISH (which of course means they wont).

Worse case scenario here is that we don't get sanctioned to spend anymore on new signings as they wont want to double the money for the guarantee, if they need to add more into the bank. Lets hope we can still get a few in. I fully expect us to max out the loan market either way which means another 4 in at least. We defo need minimum 4 more bodies in the door. 

I am still confident the lights will always be on, for whatever silly reason they still seem to want to. 

They dont wish to invest and that has always been an issue. The case is obviously an extra barrier but they wouldnt have invested anyway.

We have brought in so much in the last 6 months that its merely a case of using a slither the funds we have as a club raised ourselves. And even if they needed to invest, as you say they can use the bond. They just dont want to.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, phili said:

The Indian tax authorities do not offer out of court settlements for Fraud and Money Laundering which they are being investigated for. When under investigation, Indians Individuals and Companies are not allowed to send funds overseas without permission. The Indian tax authorities have rejected permission and Venky's have gone to court again for permission to send funds.

There is no possibility of an out of court settlement. Also the tax authorities have a 98% success rate when they charge somebody in India.

Just to follow up on Josh's point then - if their success rate in prosecutions is so high; what is it that makes Venky-s think they can win this one?

Do they have a genuine belief, or, is it merely a tit for tat retaliation against the Authorities causing them maximum inconvenience and tying them up in Court for years simply because they can?

[bluebruce]

1 hour ago, K-Hod said:

Oh aye, I wonder if California Rover still thinks they're the best owners in football..... (tongue firmly in cheek, don't fret).

Suspect this will roll onto the next meeting (16/09), once we are absolutely certain that there has actually been an adjournment and people aren't treating a livestream as fact, first! 😀.

 

How could a livestream of the actual courtroom not be fact? Am I missing/misunderstanding something here?

[lraC]

11 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Just to follow up on Josh's point then - if their success rate in prosecutions is so high; what is it that makes Venky-s think they can win this one?

Do they have a genuine belief, or, is it merely a tit for tat retaliation against the Authorities causing them maximum inconvenience and tying them up in Court for years simply because they can?

There are some similarities, between this and the decision to appeal the Lewis O'Brien appeal.

It was almost a pointless exercise appealing that, yet they did. Was it to try to demonstrate that they felt hard done by and wanted to save face, despite knowing their chances were slim to none and the same with the court case?

[J*B]

If the judge managed 16 cases today before walking out for another commitment and we where item number 36, what happens next time if he does another 16 cases before calling it a day i.e. gets to number 32? Another delay, you would assume?

Would love to hear the @RoversTrust ask this question, in addition to a question on the 98% successful prosecution rate if @phili can source it. 

[Tom]

GAME OFF

[booth]

"Won't affect operations."

Well where's the fecking goalie!?

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

I’m still struggling to fully understand the significance of the hearing. Clearly several fans believe this will directly have a bearing on whether Venky’s will sell up but has that been verified with anyone who has knowledge of the legal specifics?

I previously saw something which suggested that the most likely sanction was a large fine so wondered if there’s more to it.

[Forever Blue]

17 minutes ago, lraC said:

There are some similarities, between this and the decision to appeal the Lewis O'Brien appeal.

It was almost a pointless exercise appealing that, yet they did. Was it to try to demonstrate that they felt hard done by and wanted to save face, despite knowing their chances were slim to none and the same with the court case?

You’d have to know what’s at stake to know why they are fighting it. What are the implications to their business of losing the case? What are the potential punishments they face if they lose? etc

Edited August 20, 2024 by Forever Blue

[Giant]

If you ask me, I think most court cases get dragged out for as long as possible so that lawyers etc etc can make as much money from their clients as possible. Same the world over, apart from rioters in England.

[phili]

35 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Just to follow up on Josh's point then - if their success rate in prosecutions is so high; what is it that makes Venky-s think they can win this one?

Do they have a genuine belief, or, is it merely a tit for tat retaliation against the Authorities causing them maximum inconvenience and tying them up in Court for years simply because they can?

They haven't got to the being charged yet by Indian authorities apart from the house.

The court case today was just an appeal to request permission to send funds overseas as it was rejected by Indian authorities.

The result of the investigation and future appeals could take years still and while under investigation they need permission to send funds overseas. The default position is they can't, each time they ask for permission it is a new case and despite what Waggot says each request is reviewed independently and no president set. 

[MB Rover]

32 minutes ago, J*B said:

If the judge managed 16 cases today before walking out for another commitment and we where item number 36, what happens next time if he does another 16 cases before calling it a day i.e. gets to number 32? Another delay, you would assume?

Would love to hear the @RoversTrust ask this question, in addition to a question on the 98% successful prosecution rate if @phili can source it. 

Wondering if the Rovers trust can raise this message too from me, sell the club you fucking nob heads.

[phili]

34 minutes ago, J*B said:

If the judge managed 16 cases today before walking out for another commitment and we where item number 36, what happens next time if he does another 16 cases before calling it a day i.e. gets to number 32? Another delay, you would assume?

Would love to hear the @RoversTrust ask this question, in addition to a question on the 98% successful prosecution rate if @phili can source it. 

I will dig the link out for you tonight and post to the thread.

Edited August 20, 2024 by phili