I could be wrong, but I think the word legal was place there, to make it seem right. There is no legal impediment, but you are spot on and I have been a pains to state to other posters on here, that there is a huge impediment to them funding.

Explains why he held out.

Certainly feels like the slowest walk to the gallows this last 15yrs 🤮

I prefer to call it Gallows Humour Tony 😂

Bloody hell Tony, that's 2 bits of humour in 2 days! Have you got a bird on the go 😉

Always maintained next years retention list will be more interesting. Unless any are sold, then Batth, Weimann (if they sign), Hyam, Brittain, Travis, Tronstad and Hedges will be all out of contract this time next year. That's likely over half of our first choice starting 11 this coming season.

It wasn't cleverly worded, it was just a lie. An impediment isn't something that categorically prevents something, it is a hindrance, an obstacle, an encumberance. To say there are no impediments was always a lie. To have to allocate twice as much money is definitely an obstacle. It can be crossed, but absolutely it impairs the ease with which money can be sent.

My guess is that Hedges has been kept around with a view to him being a regular starter, rather than merely being a squad player.

Ideally Hedges isn't a starting player, but I can sort of understand keeping him around if only because it's one fewer player we need to sign. I think we genuinely need to be signing six or seven players minimum at this point, at least half of them regular first team starters. I think we are going to sign maybe four. If we released Hedges we'd need to sign seven or eight, and we'd still likely sign four. He works hard, can cover several positions and is cheap. He's not great, but he's not quite as bad as some on here make out. Would I trust our recruitment to replace him with a better player on a free transfer on similar wages whilst also addressing all the other gaps in the squad? I'd barely trust them to get the order right at a chippy. It's all depressing.

Elliott Jackson has done a bit of a spin aarticle saying how ruthless we have been with that retained list. Have we? We have given Hedges a new deal as its easy and cheap. We have given Weimann who is old and injured a contract offer, obviously Batth is a no brainer so that only leaves Forshaw who even then, and as he admits, we may revisit that one.

I mean the accounts show they sent across £5-10m at a few points since the court-case to keep the lights on so-to speak, but it is clear they have been unwilling to do so unless it endangered bankruptcy of day-to-day operations. Certainly they have not invested what Suhail/Waggot claim and almost none of it has gone to improving the club, facilities or players.

That would still mean they could send some funds, but not nothing at all. There is probably something hidden that we are not aware, where putting extra funds into a bond, is far riskier that we as fans think.

This is what makes me think that accounting wise they have set a very specific figure to fund the club through the loans, which they refuse to budge on, hence the guarantee manifestly impeding investment in the club. As to why they cannot/will not budge who knows...

Interesting, is there potentially a way to leverage the shareholders in the company against the mismanagement of the company asset/investment then? Or do Venkys own too many of the shares?

Sounds like they must have been very naughty!!!

I suppose with price hikes in the BEnd/JW and for kids tickets if we limp to 8,500 they probably won’t be too far off last year’s revenue… bonuses all round! 🍾

8,000 sold vs 9,100 last season is a significant downgrade, with miminal expectation that many more will be sold at these prices, I imagine. That's a lot of lost revenue. Let's see how they spin this one...

Some of us are.

So more legal costs for an issue that is not causing them any problems? They must think we are daft.

So the stand nobody sees is slightly fuller, but at a cheaper price, and we now have a substantially emptier JW and BEnd... with an overall reduction of bums on seats (as they'll now do well to get close to the 9,100 we sold last summer at these phase 2 prices) *and* revenue. Takes some doing that from the Regime Brains Trust. 👏

Just on this point. I think I heard them discussing this option. I’m certain the case was then (whatever the option under discussion was) the hearing was then adjourned for both sides to take client instructions.

The way the Venkys’ barrister worded things this morning gave the impression the guarantee monies are sent to the authorities. He referred to ‘them’ having both the guarantee monies and the seized properties (and specified the sums involved for both) It was almost a ‘what more do they want?’ moment.

I suspect it has cost them to keep on making these appeals, so as you correctly say, why would they keep going back to court, paying the relevant fees and their lawyers, when there is no problem. Of course there is a problem, but they want certain people, including the fans, to accept that there isn't. I wonder why?

Of course not, but why go to court at all if they aren’t a problem* *Obviously they are a problem of Venkys own choosing because (as you say) they could just cover the monies without a second thought.

Adam Murray isn't coming to us. https://www.thenationalleague.org.uk/murray-the-man-for-kidderminster-as-new-boss-named-83634