lraC

Funds transferred to buy the property are around £7m but what if it’s all funds transferred since 2011. Now that would be fun.

Just to clarify on this. Does the 3x penalty means the amount they transferred, plus the value of the property? That would equate to £28m which despite their wealth, is surely a kick in the teeth.

That blows a hole in some interpretations, as some have said, with it being a transaction in the UK the Indian government can’t get involved.

No worries. I just checked on Twitter and Rory mentions Alexander house going on the market in April 2024. Not sure if it’s sold though.

Any idea when a decision will be made?

The model of having to appeal to a court, to allow them to send funds, without a bond model, isn’t one I’m not familiar with, from any other club. It must be unique to Rovers this, as surely it is one that has never come up before.

I would be very surprised if we hold onto him, as it is looking increasingly likely that the latest request for funds, is not happening. As, we saw with the court hearing, the owners were attempting to have the need for a bond removed, but it was only reduce to 50%. I have a feeling they are worried that the bond will be lost, as well as the seized properties and assuming that is the way they are thinking, then the only way to keep us afloat is to sell.

That's good news, I can hardly wait to see Hedges back flip, when he scores.

Thanks. Sounds like a dangerous man to own one of our clubs and makes you wonder yet again, about fit and proper.

This has appeared today and goes to show, how a club at a similar level to Rovers, can easily go this way, with poor/questionable owners. I can't remember it, but apparently he owned Leeds at one point. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/brescia-go-bankrupt-lose-right-to-compete-in-pro-leagues/ar-AA1GllJx?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0def104f90a643a48f5149f5dfb6d251&ei=17

This is the most damning article out there in my opinion, as it goes into quite a bit of detail, about where the funds went, what they were supposed to be used for and seems to imply that throwing money at loss making entities abroad, may well breach some rules. https://legal.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/litigation/ed-seizes-fresh-rs-24cr-assets-of-venkateshwara-hatcheries-in-fema-probe/104293586

Funds that were transferred under the guise of being for the club, were diverted and used for other purposes, so yes you are right. What some people are saying is that the club, are not under investigation, which is true, but logic tells us that the owners being under investigation and ultimately being forced to provide a bond, which seems to have, made them reluctant to send funds, is bound to have an affect on the club.

I don’t think it’s as clear cut as the funds sent post court hearings being proven to be legitimate, meaning a return of funds. As mentioned by a recent post ED do not want them to be allowed to send money full stop. By that hopefully they are not happy with funds being used and effectively flushed down the toilet, as it is mentioned that Rovers are loss making. Using the club as a way of reducing liabilities in their own country, may well not be allowable, who knows, or even the source of the funds could be under investigation.

We all are. Lets all get behind the latest uprising and finally drive them out.

I look forward to finding out. Hopefully whatever it is, the outcome will be one, where they are forced to relinquish their ownership.

It must be a concern that despite this figure, they have still not been given their way, in having the need for the bond removed. It is surely telling, that despite £25m in property and bond monies, they are still required to provide further guarantees, in order to fund the club. They are surely, somewhere near the tipping point.

I have been talking to a couple of friends this morning and trying to establish, the amount that is either now in the bond, or have been seized, by the ED since it came to light that the owners were being investigated. It has been reported that ED initiated the investigation, in connection with illegal remittances made by the company since 2010 to date to it's wholly owned Subsidiary named M/s Venky's London Limited, Cardiff UK. Six properties were seized under the provision of Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) 1999. The value of the properties seized was £7.3M and as we are aware, since then they owners have had to apply to the court, for permission to send any further funds to VLL in order to fund the club. Due to the ruling made that a bond had to be paid at 100% of the amount transferred, this stands them at circa £23m inclusive of the value of the properties seized. Given the recent request for £4.85M to be sent, which was made in March and the recent court hearing, whereby the bond required has been reduced to 50% of future remittances, if this is indeed sent, it will stand them at £25m which is more than the initial purchase price of the club. It could well be a masterstroke by ED agreeing to 50% as it will test the resolve of the owners, who must have some serious concerns by now, that the property seized and the Bond monies, could be lost. It remains to be seen if they do send the £4.85m required, as this is to keep the club ticking over and meeting it's liabilities, not to fund transfers or pay for things like ground maintenance, so will the rumours if certain players being sold, materialise, which surely must happen, if the funds are not sent, otherwise it could be game over.

According to this article, the manager wants 90% of his squad in place by pre- season in 3 weeks, not other dates being suggested by some posters on here. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/25218452.blackburn-must-avoid-transfer-pitfall-three-examples/

I think he probably got it wrong, as he was thinking of something that you can trod in, that then stick to the bottom of your shoe.

When we have no money to pay to keep the stadium adequately maintained and clean, there will be none for transfers in.

Thanks for the explanation.

From, what I have seen in the past, about this, I think the request needs to be made in such a way that everything needs itemising and therefore proof of exactly what the funds are for. In turn, they are then presented to the court and a NOC is given and a bond for the same amount needs to be paid. I believe this bond is now 50%. Given the amount requested, you have to assume that is for the day to day running of the club and not transfers, but does anyone know if that is the case and if what I have posted is accurate?

I do agree, but the odd person on here, can usually confirm, for definite.