As the person who has been writing up the Forum minutes for a long time I would be interested in knowing where it has been reported that the minutes are not an accurate account? This is what happens - I come home and write the minutes as best I can. Then they go to the club and some changes are made. Often these are very minor changes, sometimes more information might be added. Whilst occasionally I and the Chair might go back regarding these changes nearly always we are happy with the end result. It's important to note here that we may very well not be happy with what was said, but we are happy with the factual accuracy of what we were told. What the minutes can never be is a verbatim record of everything that everyone says during the meetings. That would be unreadable and provide no more clarity. What I think does happen is that the words on the minutes do not and I don't think can ever convey the full understanding of the level of debate. They are minutes, not a drama. Finally in the past we have sometimes been told some confidential things that I am not allowed to minute. John Williams in particular did it all the time. There was none of that last night.

£25m in wages per annum and turnover £21m tells everyone who needs to know, that this is only costing more and rising, year in year out. In the words of the Grand master Flash, "The longer you stay, the more you pay".

If you got promoted, your wage would automatically go up considerably, you would potentially be offered a bumper new contract. You would be expected to be relegated again but that promotion would also be great on your CV to get you future jobs. And worst case scenario, the club sacks you and you are left being paid out for the now increased contract that you have. It makes absolutely zero sense for any manager to not want and strive for promotion. They all do, some just dont have the competence.

Great to see some Swiss ramble in this thread

I am not debating the fact that Venky's fund the club and it has cost them a fortune but the accounts don't mention anything about debt. Just profit and loss.

No I don't - aside from Portsmouth following their financial collapse no comparable sized club in England has successfully gone into fan ownership. It doesn't work at this level or size of club. Note also that Portsmouth, despite 15,000+ a week turning up in Leagues One and Two, promptly ditched the idea and sold out to the Americans because they realised that to get back up to the top 2 divisions they needed external investment. It is relatively easy to find new owners yes - if you like I could name you dozens of examples across the top 3 leagues in England. No guarantees of success I accept, but there are plenty of options out there and I think we can probably agree that they'd struggle to beat Venkys in the 'unfit and improper' rankings even if they were awful.

We are victims of the sunk cost fallacy...

Are you referring to the share allotments? There is no loan agreement saying anything needs to be paid back

One of the reasons people have said they won’t entertain a sale is they want some money back.

Well the money Venky's advance us does appear on the balance sheet as debt... £147.8M and counting. Obviously there is no way we can pay it back. But it is there in black and white (and highlighted in my yellow). https://swissramble.substack.com/p/blackburn-rovers-finances-202324

Technically, (as with Jack) aren't the amounts that have been run up long term loans to the owners with no realistic expectation they'll ever be repaid? Unless of course we got promoted and stayed there for a number of years. Edit: Wilesden beat me to it.

The club has plenty of debt to the owners - £134 million in the last set of accounts. Whether they’ll get even a penny of that back is an entirely different thing.

The club has no debt to the owners. The only money the club needs to pay to the owners ( via a subsidiary) is rent on the training ground. The money they have spent over the last 15 years are simply running costs, not investments.

Really? Do tell!

Is that holding the club to ransom? I thought he was told he wouldn't get as much game time as he was hoping for, had an opportunity to go on loan and took it? Don't tell me that the club weren't happy to offload his wages for 6 months.

Not everyone hull and sheff w fans would argue otherwise

He also argues that the fans, can't expect much in the way of transfers because our attendances are so low!

If we could be owned by a fans group or a consortium including fans I would take that . I can't really see anyone who would buy us and put money in without expecting it back. The number of unconnected owners who come into a Championship club and it works out is pretty minimal. Often turns into a total disaster. While not having wealthy owners would mean we would have to balance the books, we are closer to doing that now anyway. I think I'd prefer supporting a club run by fans with less resources, than gamble on another owner who may not be engaged for the long term. Even with less cash I would imagine an engaged fan owners would prioritise much better (e.g. getting key players to sign contracts...). Fan owned models while not big in the UK do exist - Hearts, Exeter, AFC Wimbledon.

Google “AI meeting minutes apps”

Unlikely I know, but what about an unofficial/ unapproved version with a caveat to say, these need to be ratified and agreed by all concerned and therefore cannot be guaranteed as accurate for the time being. At least that way, we see what is presented to the club and the final edited version. If you don't ask, you don't get, so I am asking.

Wind it back in cocker or maybe give up your time to help?

You don’t think being fan owned is a sensible proposition but you think a sensible response is “do what everyone else has done and just get better owners”. The way you make it sound, it should be easy to sort, crack on.

1st bit in bold- Are you trying to say the word 'accurate' here? Either way, it's unrealistic to expect such a long meeting to be recreated in the minutes. 2nd bit in bold- Completely unfair and way off the mark. As I've said before, if anyone thinks they can do a better job, they're welcome to join.

As it's been reported previously, that the minutes published aren't an acriute account of the exact minutes, I hope the unelected members of the FF call this out and not sit there like nodding dogs as usual. It's been far to long that the club keep breaking EFL rules on consultation meetings and submit the FF as fan engagement.

Why is the future being fan owned? I don't think that is a sensible proposal. No other examples of this working. Why can't we just do what everyone else has done and get better owners, more importantly ones prepared to invest