Venky’s v Indian Government (a) - 5/8/2025 - Post-Season Friendly (s/t late postponements)

[davulsukur]

Another summer of cutbacks

No investment into the squad

More sales of key players

I cannot put into words how much I detest these owners. 

[Tomphil2]

From their point of view in terms of clinging onto the club the best thing they ever did was ditch Barclays and move the banking to India.

From our point of view that probably wasn't a good thing.

[wilsdenrover]

1 hour ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

I don't think the transfer moneys due have run out - because some of them have yet to be received. Per the club's accounts at 30 June 2024 there are football related debtors of £12.29m falling due more than 1 year after the date of the accounts - ie from 1 July 2025 onwards. Therefore I think we may be looking here at a short term cash flow problem which can be addressed by a short term loan from the bank.

Plus we should still have a good chunk of the transfer fees referred to in the post balance sheet events to receive too.

I wonder how close we are to borrowing against these future guaranteed incomings?

[Tomphil2]

They always avert disaster it's the one thing they seem good at so i expect that bloke from Bolton will be getting another call for one of his high interest short term special offer jobbies.

[Exiled_Rover]

2 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It depends on your definition of "impediment".

To me if you can send money over but have to jump through a few administrative hoops to do it - that's inconvenient, but not really an impediment.

If you can't send money over because the Court have said no - now  THAT'S an impediment.

It seems at the moment the Court are allowing money to be sent. Maybe the "impediment" such as it is is not being able to get the Case heard due to time constraints?

We seem to have been able to get the case heard fairly swiftly on this occasion though when we needed it.

As I understand it we're at the inconvenience stage, and have been for 2 years - it's become an impediment for the Venkys because of the money that would sit in a Government account awaiting the resolution of this trial. They clearly know they have a very, very good chance of losing this case and that money, which is why they're so reluctant to pay it.

Which again begs the question, why not just sell Rovers if you're so reluctant to fund them? It's one less overseas liability you have to worry about - and one that absolutely detests you to boot.

[Exiled_Rover]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

As regards Rovers the ED have been over-ruled twice? now though and restrictions appear to be slowly relaxing rather than increasing, so unless something drastic changes in the meantime the Club are probably correct to assume a precedent has been set.

We probably haven't found out yet the entirety of what Venky's the organisation are being investigated for. I suppose something major could theoretically come to light which would cause us problems. Equally the wider investigation could come to nothing.

I'm not sure why these proceedings have not prompted  the EFL to consider whether Venky's the owners are still "fit and proper owners" though. That happened to the guy at Reading as I recall.

Presumably as long as the bills are still being paid there's no problem from their point of view.

Yep - players and HMRC are still being paid so there's nothing to see here as far as the EFL are concerned.

[Exiled_Rover]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Innocently mis representing the purposes of the Company seems somewhat too trivial to warrant a major investigation imo.

It's clear the current Indian regime don't like money leaving the Country full stop. So maybe they're trying to make out that the omission was deliberate to allow funds to be funneled out overseas?

Doesn't the investigation on the information so far to hand centre around the allegedly improper purchase of Neville's old house and shares  in Akon's Company using VOL money?

I'd have thought it would be pretty easy to argue they needed a suitable Base in this Country re: the house.

Not so much the shares.

 

Yes, but they listed Neville's house as a company property for farming et al, which it obviously wasn't, for a massive tax break.

If you stumbled upon that sort of casual fraud wouldn't you thoroughly investigate the company too?

[lraC]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Innocently mis representing the purposes of the Company seems somewhat too trivial to warrant a major investigation imo.

It's clear the current Indian regime don't like money leaving the Country full stop. So maybe they're trying to make out that the omission was deliberate to allow funds to be funneled out overseas?

Doesn't the investigation on the information so far to hand centre around the allegedly improper purchase of Neville's old house and shares  in Akon's Company using VOL money?

I'd have thought it would be pretty easy to argue they needed a suitable Base in this Country re: the house.

Not so much the shares.

 

It seems they misrepresented the activities of their business to the state bank of India.

This can seem quite trivial, but, if you are obtaining funding that way, it is a very serious offence. Obtaining money by deception/ mortgage fraud. 

[OldEwoodBlue]

Several impediments.

1. Having to apply to the court to send funds - or they can't.

2. Having to put 100% previously or 50% this time into a bank guarantee.

3. Getting into court in the first place.

 

In this instance, they applied 26th March to be able to transfer urgent funds to cover April-June essential outgoings.

2 months to get into court.

So in theory next month they need to request transferring funds to coverJuly-Sept outgoings.

They won't do. Q3 is being funded by player sales and (probably) transfer installments, aided by more cost cutting (downgrading). 100%

[lraC]

https://www.lendingtree.com/home/mortgage/mortgage-fraud/

[Tomphil2]

They got rumbled for the House and Akon misuse of funds listed as football investment but how ?

Surely they had to be being looked at for suspicion of something else for that to flag up after all these years.

Something else kicked all this off and what we are seeing now is collateral damage and iv'e often wondered if there's ever been a request over there for the British equivalent to comb the books over here.

I presume they'd have to present some strong evidence or suspicion though but seething as Starmer has allowed himself to be penetrated by the Indian govt you never know if doors could open.

[wilsdenrover]

20 minutes ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

Several impediments.

1. Having to apply to the court to send funds - or they can't.

2. Having to put 100% previously or 50% this time into a bank guarantee.

3. Getting into court in the first place.

In this instance, they applied 26th March to be able to transfer urgent funds to cover April-June essential outgoings.

2 months to get into court.

So in theory next month they need to request transferring funds to coverJuly-Sept outgoings.

They won't do. Q3 is being funded by player sales and (probably) transfer installments, aided by more cost cutting (downgrading). 100%

They filed the appeal on the 22nd April (see below) so 4 weeks after our CFO let them know we needed money to cover April to June obligations.

Shows how high up their list of priorities the Venkys see us.

 

Edited yesterday at 16:02 by wilsdenrover

[Forever Blue]

3 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It depends on your definition of "impediment".

To me if you can send money over but have to jump through a few administrative hoops to do it - that's inconvenient, but not really an impediment.

If you can't send money over because the Court have said no - now  THAT'S an impediment.

It seems at the moment the Court are allowing money to be sent. Maybe the "impediment" such as it is is not being able to get the Case heard due to time constraints?

We seem to have been able to get the case heard fairly swiftly on this occasion though when we needed it.

I’ve been saying this for a while. There’s no impediment if they can send money. Some have never quite grasped that part.

The funny thing is by parroting the same nonsense the fans who haven’t quite grasped it are actually protecting Venkys. The reality is Venkys are choosing not to send money. Nobody is stopping them. There is no impediment. They are choosing to cover costs when they have to and nothing else.

THAT IS A CHOICE!

[wilsdenrover]

1 minute ago, Forever Blue said:

I’ve been saying this for a while. There’s no impediment if they can send money. Some have never quite grasped that part.

The funny thing is by parroting the same nonsense the fans who haven’t quite grasped it are actually protecting Venkys. The reality is Venkys are choosing not to send money. Nobody is stopping them. There is no impediment. They are choosing to cover costs when they have to and nothing else.

THAT IS A CHOICE!

Venkys are the impediment. 

[Forever Blue]

3 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

Here is how I see it…

The bank guarantee is only an impediment if the Venkys aren’t willing to fund it.

Evidence suggests they’re only willing to fund it when the situation absolutely forces them to do so.

Ergo (imo) it’s an impediment. 

 

 

No, it’s a choice. 

[RevidgeBlue]

3 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

I’ve been saying this for a while. There’s no impediment if they can send money. Some have never quite grasped that part.

The funny thing is by parroting the same nonsense the fans who haven’t quite grasped it are actually protecting Venkys. The reality is Venkys are choosing not to send money. Nobody is stopping them. There is no impediment. They are choosing to cover costs when they have to and nothing else.

THAT IS A CHOICE!

That's exactly how I see it as well. 

They COULD send more money over under the existing conditions if they really wanted. They just don't want.

To my mind, choosing not to is worse than being prevented from doing so. Irrespective of whether it's your fault in the first place.

 

 

[Forever Blue]

12 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Venkys are the impediment. 

Exactly!

[wilsdenrover]

Just now, Forever Blue said:

Exactly!

Do I win a prize 😁😁

[OldEwoodBlue]

10 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

I’ve been saying this for a while. There’s no impediment if they can send money. Some have never quite grasped that part.

The funny thing is by parroting the same nonsense the fans who haven’t quite grasped it are actually protecting Venkys. The reality is Venkys are choosing not to send money. Nobody is stopping them. There is no impediment. They are choosing to cover costs when they have to and nothing else.

THAT IS A CHOICE!

Venkys wanted to send money in April.

They have been impeded from doing so for the past 2 months.

What do you not grasp. ?

 

And yes, by and large they are choosing not to and let the club fund itself.

However, as proven, when they need to, there are significant impediments.

[RevidgeBlue]

36 minutes ago, lraC said:

It seems they misrepresented the activities of their business to the state bank of India.

This can seem quite trivial, but, if you are obtaining funding that way, it is a very serious offence. Obtaining money by deception/ mortgage fraud. 

The BOI dont seem to have any issue with them though as far as Im aware?

I'm not fully up to speed on what they're meant to have done or not done but obviously, yes, IF that has occurred that potentially could be quite serious.

The only things I was aware of were allegedly improperly using VOL funds (which obviously should only be used for BRFC purposes) to buy Neville's old house and the Akon shares

[Tomphil2]

But giving a govt who are actively trying to nail you for something they presumably haven't yet found is a massive risk for anyone.

Again not defending them it's just the harsh reality every time they hand some over or provide guarantees they might be waving goodbye to it if they govt turns something else up or comes up with an excuse to pilfer it.

It is to my mind an impossible situation that could go on and on, there is only ONE realistic outcome unless it all gets canned quickly and that is Rovers go bust.

There is only two realistic ways to counter that under their watch pay up when needed or SELL !

[RevidgeBlue]

1 minute ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

Venkys wanted to send money in April.

They have been impeded from doing so for the past 2 months.

What do you not grasp. ?

 

And yes, by and large they are choosing not to and let the club fund itself.

However, as proven, when they need to, there are significant impediments.

We got the case heard PDQ this time compared to all the others.

Perhaps there's ways and means when you really need it.

[Forever Blue]

2 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

The BOI dont seem to have any issue with them though as far as Im aware?

I'm not fully up to speed on what they're meant to have done or not done but obviously, yes, IF that has occurred that potentially could be quite serious.

The only things I was aware of were allegedly improperly using VOL funds (which obviously should only be used for BRFC purposes) to buy Neville's old house and the Akon shares

I think the charge is they bought Neville’s house with money they said was being sent over for use in their poultry business. 

[wilsdenrover]

2 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

We got the case heard PDQ this time compared to all the others.

Perhaps there's ways and means when you really need it.

It was higher up the list this time as it was deemed a new matter (albeit clearly linked to the ongoing one). 

[RevidgeBlue]

8 minutes ago, Tomphil2 said:

But giving a govt who are actively trying to nail you for something they presumably haven't yet found is a massive risk for anyone.

Again not defending them it's just the harsh reality every time they hand some over or provide guarantees they might be waving goodbye to it if they govt turns something else up or comes up with an excuse to pilfer it.

It is to my mind an impossible situation that could go on and on, there is only ONE realistic outcome unless it all gets canned quickly and that is Rovers go bust.

There is only two realistic ways to counter that under their watch pay up when needed or SELL !

Yep. 

(Speculating here)......maybe it's like Exiled said and they know there are further matters yet to be uncovered therefore they know they'd be likely to lose any monies put up as guarantee.

But.....(Thinking aloud) If all other dealings related to Rovers are above board then even with a politically motivated Government gunning for you, surely any guarantees given in that respect should be safe and there shouldn't be any worries in that respect about sending money over.

It's a weird one.