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

[lraC]

2 hours ago, arbitro said:

Thanks wilsdenrover and IraC for your efforts and patience in searching through documents to keep us updated.

There is plenty of debate about the potential signing of a player nobody has heard of but this topic is far more important for the future of Rovers.

Thanks Tony and yes, this topic is critical in terms of what is likely to happen in the coming months.

Hopefully people are getting a grip on what is really happening, as there has been some serious miss understanding about the two court cases.

[Tomphil2]

Only last night i read some kid saying Venkys are now paying DOUBLE  for players because of the court case so we can't spend much because of that.

It's enough to make you cry it really is.

Edited 20 hours ago by Tomphil2

[DutchRover]

2 hours ago, 47er said:

Good article on Rovers spending under Venkys.

https://footballeconomyv2.blogspot.com/2025/06/just-what-do-venkys-get-out-of-owning.html

3rd highest director remuneration in Championship despite 4th lowest revenue; despicable.

11th most debt in England is also frightening, and entirely the fault of the owners as far as I am concerned. Their management is debt-loading the club and giving them an excuse to keep cutting budgets while trying to increase revenue. But this will only decrease revenue and competitiveness in the long term and risk further losses. It literally makes no sense.

 

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, lraC said:

Thanks Tony and yes, this topic is critical in terms of what is likely to happen in the coming months.

Hopefully people are getting a grip on what is really happening, as there has been some serious miss understanding about the two court cases.

I'm expecting that in terms of the main investigation Venky's get fined at some point, and before that happens,  in terms of the application to get the need for a guarantee removed, it'll either be removed or stay at 50%. 

Neither of which will materially affect us as it seems they've given up on wanting to fund us properly anyway. If and when the proceedings ever reach a conclusion I can't see them suddenly wanting to fund us as they did previously.

In the meantime we'll limp on getting into a worse and worse state. The only hope as I see it is that either any judgment provokes the EFL into deciding they're no longer "fit and proper" for the purposes of owning the Club or the Coalition somehow embarrass or needle them into selling in the interim.

[RevidgeBlue]

4 hours ago, arbitro said:

Thanks wilsdenrover and IraC for your efforts and patience in searching through documents to keep us updated.

There is plenty of debate about the potential signing of a player nobody has heard of but this topic is far more important for the future of Rovers.

Agreed. Wilesden's commentary and interpretation of what seems to be going on is especially brilliant.

Have the LT even acknowledged there's been another hearing? I may have missed it but scandalous from our so called local newspaper if not.

[DutchRover]

LT has never had any interest in the court cases and funding issues, too happy to repeat Suhails line.

[Browjd]

Why is Jackson not covering at all?!

[lraC]

1 minute ago, Browjd said:

Why is Jackson not covering at all?!

My guess would be, it is so serious, that if he stated, what is really going on, it would lead to a proper uprising, but that is my guess. Reports so far are few and far between, especially the critical ones.

He is on Twitter, so I am sure he can be asked for those, who use that platform. 

[arbitro]

1 minute ago, Browjd said:

Why is Jackson not covering at all?!

It's a free hit for him too. If he reads the posts from wilsdenrover and IraC it will save him trawling through documents. Hell fire he could actually join this forum and pm and ask them for information.

He is either lazy or there is some kind of veiled threat to his employers from Pasha.

[wilsdenrover]

3 hours ago, Tomphil2 said:

Confirms 14 million a year not the fabled 20 mill.

What’s a circa £80 million exaggeration between friends. 

[wilsdenrover]

1 hour ago, Tomphil2 said:

Only last night i read some kid saying Venkys are now paying DOUBLE  for players because of the court case so we can't spend much because of that.

It's enough to make you cry it really is.

Even that argument should end with them blaming Venkys. 

[jim mk2]

There are complications for local papers, which are in structural decline with increasingly stretched owners, to cover a story like this - not least the legal implications and the possibility of action is they get anything wrong.  

That's my guess - it's all too difficult

[Rogerb]

6 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

There are complications for local papers, which are in structural decline with increasingly stretched owners, to cover a story like this - not least the legal implications and the possibility of action is they get anything wrong.  

That's my guess - it's all too difficult

The court rulings are in the public domain if you know where to look. If they stick to the facts of reporting the ruling verbatim then legally they are in the clear how that goes down with those running the club is a different matter entirely.

[wilsdenrover]

51 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Agreed. Wilesden's commentary and interpretation of what seems to be going on is especially brilliant.

Have the LT even acknowledged there's been another hearing? I may have missed it but scandalous from our so called local newspaper if not.

That’s very kind of you to say so. Thank you. 

[lraC]

9 minutes ago, Rogerb said:

The court rulings are in the public domain if you know where to look. If they stick to the facts of reporting the ruling verbatim then legally they are in the clear how that goes down with those running the club is a different matter entirely.

I do believe that's the problem. Reporting the facts in the local paper, will lead to some serious disenchantment amongst the fan base. Plenty still believe that the owners have been harshly treated for a minor error, whereas in reality, it is a lot more serious than that, when you look beneath the surface.

Even today posters on here, are happy to state, it won't have much of an impact on the club and that may well be correct, but my views are it is game over, if what the ED are investigating them for, does prove to be accurate and they are punished in line with that.

[rigger]

29 minutes ago, lraC said:

I do believe that's the problem. Reporting the facts in the local paper, will lead to some serious disenchantment amongst the fan base. Plenty still believe that the owners have been harshly treated for a minor error, whereas in reality, it is a lot more serious than that, when you look beneath the surface.

Even today posters on here, are happy to state, it won't have much of an impact on the club and that may well be correct, but my views are it is game over, if what the ED are investigating them for, does prove to be accurate and they are punished in line with that.

perhaps they should have said: Not much detrimental impact.

[paullarrygher]

I've asked Elliot Jackson multiple times on Twitter about any plans to report on latest court order. I've shared the link to the order and asked if he's asked club whether the £4.9m has been put in, but total silence.

The lack of reporting could be because:

• he doesn't see it as new news or any change to what the LT have previously reported. 
• he's unwilling to write about it due to potential of reporting it incorrectly (and the legal/reputation repercussions of that).
• the club have told him that reporting on it will lead to them withdrawing access or not confirming stories etc.

[MarkBRFC]

Yet he tweets things like this...

I personally think it's because he's not very good at what he does and it's too difficult for him to look into or get his head around.

Lazy.

[Tomphil2]

More likely hes decided or been told to take the club line on this and only comment when they do or some other story breaks.

The LT in recent years very follows the lead of elsewhere on these kind of things, somebody else breaks the news or does a story then they quickly follow with their own.

They aren't local investigative reporters anymore and i also suspect the club itself has a lot to do with gagging stuff.

[RevidgeBlue]

27 minutes ago, paullarrygher said:

I've asked Elliot Jackson multiple times on Twitter about any plans to report on latest court order. I've shared the link to the order and asked if he's asked club whether the £4.9m has been put in, but total silence.

The lack of reporting could be because:

• he doesn't see it as new news or any change to what the LT have previously reported. 
• he's unwilling to write about it due to potential of reporting it incorrectly (and the legal/reputation repercussions of that).
• the club have told him that reporting on it will lead to them withdrawing access or not confirming stories etc.

From previous experience I'd imagine it's the latter.

Really from the Club's point of view the fact the Court authorised the transfer of funds again and agreed to reduce the amount of the guarantee should be being spun as a bit of positive news.

That's obviously assuming they actually intend to send the £4.85m over though.

Have said this many times before but by now I think these proceedings are a bit of a red herring. It's quite convenient from the Club's point of view for a large section of the fan base not to be in the loop about what's happening. Said fans continue to labour under the commonly repeated misapprehension that they have to pay double on any funds transferred which makes them feel sorry for the owners and in their mind excuses them from having to fund the Club properly.

Edited 16 hours ago by RevidgeBlue

[superniko]

Found this one baffling….how are we bringing in less broadcasting revenue now compared to 2015 and 2016?

There is a ridiculous amount of matches televised these days and we appear to be none the better for it.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, lraC said:

Even today posters on here, are happy to state, it won't have much of an impact on the club 

I just think you are likely to be disappointed if you think these proceedings will lead to the the immediate or fairly quick removal of Venkys from the Club.

The only caveat to that imo is if the EFL decide that any judgment and punishment imposed means that they are no longer "fit and proper" for the purposes of the ownership test.

Currently they aren't sending any money over and they seem be labouring under some fanciful notion that the Club can survive in the long run by developing and selling on academy players without investing anything significant on players to begin with. I don't see the lack of funding changing irrespective of what happens with the Court proceedings.

Either way they need to go asap and I certainly won't be upset if they get fined gazillions and decide to step aside as you're hoping.

[Mashed Potatoes]

44 minutes ago, superniko said:

Found this one baffling….how are we bringing in less broadcasting revenue now compared to 2015 and 2016?

There is a ridiculous amount of matches televised these days and we appear to be none the better for it.

We were relegated from the Premier League in 2012. At the time parachute payments were paid to relegated clubs for the next 4 years so were still being received in 2015 and 2016.

[wilsdenrover]

44 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

I just think you are likely to be disappointed if you think these proceedings will lead to the the immediate or fairly quick removal of Venkys from the Club.

The only caveat to that imo is if the EFL decide that any judgment and punishment imposed means that they are no longer "fit and proper" for the purposes of the ownership test.

Currently they aren't sending any money over and they seem be labouring under some fanciful notion that the Club can survive in the long run by developing and selling on academy players without investing anything significant on players to begin with. I don't see the lack of funding changing irrespective of what happens with the Court proceedings.

Either way they need to go asap and I certainly won't be upset if they get fined gazillions and decide to step aside as you're hoping.

I’ve looked at the EFL disqualifying criteria and am not hopeful of this happening. 

[superniko]

6 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

We were relegated from the Premier League in 2012. At the time parachute payments were paid to relegated clubs for the next 4 years so were still being received in 2015 and 2016.

Ah that was in the back of my mind but 1) forgot it was 4 years back then and 2) it’s such a small difference in the grand scheme of parachute payments now.

These muppets really did relegate us at the worst possible time