I suppose they key question is whether they are likely to lose the bond or not. Given it’s at least 9 months so far, since their last payment, it is looking like they think they will.

The ex Rovers Telegraph reporter, penning an article on the court hearing, but the current one hasn’t bothered. Perhaps he believes that it doesn’t affect Rovers, as Waggott has stated, but at least we now know, there is definitely no impediment.

You are right. There are people, who again say they support the club, who don’t know about the court case.

I guess what Brian P is checking will confirm this. Bond or guarantee could be the difference between them paying into an account or simply guaranteeing future funds.

It’s not a criminal matter.

It’s no different to them letting a Rothwell, or Brereton, walk for nothing. A few million turning into dust over night, so there is something deeper at play here, in my view.

That’s their prerogative, but hopefully there are stronger groups around to get him taken to task properly.

There are plenty of points raised on here alone, to blow that bullshit away, let alone the wider fan base It is over to the people with his ear now to make sure he does not get away with it.

Put another way, we need to sell some more players for £21m and quickly, to make up the shortfall of £7m per annum. I don't think the entire squad is worth that.

Hopefully someone is going to exert some pressure to ensure a statement is made, about what is a very serious situation.

Spot on. People thinking the £40m coming in from transfer and add ons is going to cover everything, may well be right, but that is the very short term picture. in a lot of ways, if a wage comes into a household for £3k per month and the regular out goings are £4k you can only sell your assets for so long, before you default. This is the position of our football club, as things stand.

It is highly unlikely that they will be able to make that statement again, in the next accounts, so in my view, they need to explain what the plans are, once we get there. That statement was made for a reason after all.

Look carefully at what Waggott himself has said about the way these funds are structured and assuming what he is saying is correct, we will not have enough to pay the day to day costs.

Just let that statement, written by Crimpshine and posted into the accounts sink in. This needs to be addressed by the people pulling the strings at Ewood and quickly. This is from the Chartered accountants that act for BRFC here, so it becomes very serious now. If the court does not permit the release of future funds, there will be a significant impact on the company's ability to continue to trade"

I would call that a mountain of Everest proportions.

This is exactly why Waggott's statement about no impediment needs to be called out. He knows only too well, that there is a huge impediment and that this is effectively meaning no funds are being made available for the running of the club. The fans deserve better and all he does is make fools of us and expect us all to be taken in by his bullshit. A request for funds has gone into the club has it, then please do let us know what the outcome of said request is then.

Those were the days when the fit and proper led to the likes of Robert Maxwell, owning the club, otherwise known as a consortium of would be pensioners, caught unawares. Its come a long way that fit and proper regime, as the likes of tax fiddling money launderers are now owning clubs.

I suppose you didn’t have to wonder now, how presenting the sales of players, spread out over several payments is a convenient way of showing the court, we are still skint?

Whichever way you look at this, why has Waggott gone on record to say, there is no impediment to them sending funds. Is it a bare faced lie, or does he not understand the meaning of the word impediment?

Has he heard about the court hearing yet?

If a NOC has not been issued today, they cannot send funds, in my opinion, so the big question is, was one issued? VHL.pdf

I guess this come back to the questions I raised earlier, in that was a no objection certificate issued today. Thanks for posting this Duncan and clearing up a miss conception about what the hearing was about. I take it the trust are going to check about the NOC with Waggott now and perhaps, question why, he has chosen to state on previous occasions that there is no impediment to them funding, when there clearly is. Are WATR issuing a statement on the matter?

They have already broken the conditions of the bond, so stand to lose it. They have stated the funds need to be sent to protect their investment. I don't know the terminology used for putting money into a loss making venture, but given that every £ seems to to drop to around 25p or less, it is certainly not an investment they are protecting, but propping up an ailing business.

There are some similarities, between this and the decision to appeal the Lewis O'Brien appeal. It was almost a pointless exercise appealing that, yet they did. Was it to try to demonstrate that they felt hard done by and wanted to save face, despite knowing their chances were slim to none and the same with the court case?

I think the time is ripe to attract new membership here, if this court decision, is anything to go by. I am not a member, but will happily become one, if this is now the time to strike and get some real answers to this issue. Is there anyone else on here, feeling the same way?