JHRover

My interpretation of that is that this is how it was done previously - that the court considered the application, decided to allow permission to send funds but on the condition they deposited the same amount in India as security. So they are saying there is nothing stopping them funding us based on that - the Court was content to allow it subject to the deposit being paid. They are expecting the same thing to happen the next time they have to get permission from the Court, which is due to be August 20th as it stands. Now the Court could change its mind and say no, we aren't allowing this, but based on precedent this is unlikely as previous judges have permitted it and refusing it would cause a business to fail and jobs to be lost, so that's why Rovers expect it to be renewed if needed. If needed because they are likely to bring in sufficient cash by then to cover the next batch of costs through player sales. Far preferable to people who don't care or understand football because they don't see it causing any problems and it saves them the hassle of going to court and putting money in a bond in India.

That's the opposite of what I understood the case to be. I was under the impression that the Court hearing is to consider whether to grant permission to send further funds to the UK to meet Rovers' outgoings. A similar procedure to that of November 2023 and a delay to the hearing that should have taken place earlier this year. A process that is essential to ensure the club keeps going, unless money is raised from other sources to cover for it. Unless I've missed something this is linked to the house purchase in that the restrictions imposed are a result of an investigation into that purchase but as yet that remains ongoing and it remains to be seen whether they have a case to answer in India on that front.

I'm convinced that the only way we will ever be rid of them is if either a Court or government agency intervenes and forces them out. I think this is the best chance we will ever get. If this investigation or legal process ends with the restrictions being lifted or allows them to continue to fund the club 'on the drip' like they have for the last 12 months or so then we are facing a long, slow, painful demise. If this process ends with them being told 'no more' then it is likely to be painful but will have to happen quickly and we'd be rid of them. What comes next might be no better, but it would take some going to be any worse.

My view is that the only time personal resources have been tipped into the equation is on the rare occasions such as when we signed Jordan Rhodes, Brereton and Gallagher. Big money signings totally out of kilter with the other business done during their tenure. This is why we see Ewood falling into disrepair, zero substantial investment in facilities. The wages, running costs, bills get covered by the company as essential expenditure. Most transfer dosh we spend is too - covered either by prior sales or from installments on media etc. But the added extra cash - the non-essential, above and beyond costs like Rhodes and Brereton come when someone in India fancies a flutter. Probably when they're at their most engaged / ambitious be that after relegation wanting to show some determination to 'make up' for it or after promotion wanting to enjoy the moment. In most cases those outlays recouped anyway, certainly was with Rhodes and Armstrong. Let us not lose sight of the fact that the cutbacks started during covid and have continued since then, long before whispers of troubles in India. This suggests that the developments in India were either known to them a long time ago or that they have simply accelerated a process they'd already started of their own choice.

To be honest I expect that the owners will want it to be delayed. They can't be keen on the cost, hassle and hurdles they are having to go through just to get permission to send money over the keep the lights on. I agree that it is likely permission would get granted based on precedent, but even so it isn't certain and seems an awful lot of hassle, together with the need for them to deposit the same amount in a bond in India as security. Much, much easier for the owners to simply generate millions from selling players and divert those funds to cover the running costs for a few months. Kicks the can down the road, saves them trouble in India and they hope that eventually the restrictions get lifted. Unfortunately for us we are going to have to watch our squad be dismembered and with it likely relegation to League One. But hey, at least they're keeping the lights on and we aren't doing a Bury so job's a good un.

Indeed. The way I see it is that the application is listed for 20th August. Assuming the Court hears the case, the owners can request permission to send a further tranche of funds to Rovers. If the last hearing is anything to go buy this won't be a transfer warchest, it will be essential funds to keep the lights on and wages paid, the argument being that if it isn't permitted the club goes bust. If before August 20th circumstances change, and bringing in many millions from Raya and Szmodics would obviously change things, then the club will not need the owners to send any money over. The hearing becomes pointless because they would not have any need to get permission from court, the club could meet its obligations using those funds without the need for a transfer from India. So instead they could ask for the hearing to be put back to January or whenever they estimate funds running dry again.

The bit of that quote that I've underlined in bold I really don't understand, I doubt the writer does either. Is August 20 the 'final date' for Venkys' court hearing? Is there anything stopping the Court from a further adjournment or indeed the owners themselves putting their application on hold if they don't need to send money over (via further sales generating running costs instead). 'Feels growingly prominent' - hold on a minute, I thought only last week he was parroting Waggott's claim that the hearing was strictly in relation to procedural and technical issues and not really anything to do with their funding of Rovers. Surely he's not now saying that it is vital to our transfer plans? Frankly hilarious that they are now even talking about 'keeping the lights on' as though it is something to be impressed about. How much lower can these scumbags drag standards.

We'd have had to offer him more money than his current deal at Notts and more than Millwall were able to offer. I doubt we are capable of either these days.

Every. Single. Summer. Season tickets released late, on sale for a good while with the vast majority of those that will sign up already done so, then they come out with a membership scheme towards the very back end expecting people to cough up even more. I would ask why it is beyond their capabilities to just announce the membership schemes at the same time as season tickets, thereby giving people full information in one go to make an informed decision knowing what they are getting and so they can pay for it all at once. Instead we get people signing up for season tickets then finding out later that they will need to pay even more on top at a later stage to get other benefits not provided for under a season ticket. But I know the reason why, they are so inept and poorly organised that they're just making it up from one week to the next. I really think that Waggott just hatches these membership scheme ideas as a way to rake in a few grand to see him through the barren summer months. I was furious last time around when they used the Burnley away game as an opportunity to extract more cash from fans with the membership requirement and had zero intention of getting one last season until we drew Harrogate in the cup and knew I needed one. This time around it looks like the price has increased again to £20 for ST holders, having been £10 in 2022 and £15 last year yet the benefits are even less, as you no longer get priority on away tickets (a good development) just some extra loyalty points.

Is there any other Championship club in the luxurious position of having recently banked £30 million in sales and sell on fees with which to attack the market? We've had all of February, March, April, May and June to put the Adam Wharton cash to use. Making excuses about the Euros and other clubs with a fraction of that cash not doing business just isn't good enough. We need to be proactive and make our own way not just think of reasons why we can't do things.

This is where I'm at. I have no issue at all with us offloading the likes of Wahltstedt and Telalovic IF they are replaced with new signings. But the more likely outcome is it will be another couple of wages off the books and another £1 million in sales and then we turn to academy kids and if lucky an Everton or Liverpool loanee or two. It will be popular with some for getting shut of those two and their wages and bringing in some cash, but it really doesn't get us anywhere unless we are bringing in some quality the other way.

I think we all want and recognise the need for an experienced goalkeeper after what we witnessed last season. But what we might want and what these awful owners and executives allow us to have are totally different Eustace can say until he's blue in the face that he wants a proven goalkeeper. JDT repeatedly said he wanted an experienced CB. Didn't get it The owners and executives don't care what we or the coaching staff want They'll get what suits the owners on cost and timescales. And that in the vast majority of cases means the proven players look elsewhere.

Krul is just this summer's Danny Batth. They'll keep dragging it out and mucking around but in the end he won't come purely and simply because we won't pay what is needed. Then come the end they'll dress it up as the player greedily demanding too much money, wanting guaranteed games which we won't offer, wanting younger players to have the opportunity blah blah blah.

I'm struggling to name 3 clubs that I would bet on us finishing above. People will take the easy route and say Oxford / Portsmouth but both those clubs have ambitious owners. I can certainly say both will be better run clubs than us aiming to do more than merely exist from one season to the next, It is also highly likely both will invest more than we do and I suspect both will be offering more on the wage front than we are. Other than that I'm struggling. We benefited last season from a couple of chaos clubs in Huddersfield and Birmingham but both are gone. Plymouth maybe with the Rooney appointment but they'll act if it isn't working, they won't wait until February like we did with Coyle.

Lots of 'records' being broken this summer. Just a shame nobody trustworthy is able to verify that.

Plus that we have no commercial department and a bloke running the club with no track record of anything in the game save for trying to sell training grounds off for housing.

Difference is that other clubs bid for players with a genuine intention and capacity to get the deal done. Of course many won't and bigger or richer clubs will come in and outbid, but nevertheless ownership down want it to happen. Here I'm increasingly convinced that a large portion of our transfer 'efforts' consist of chasing players we aren't ever going to be willing to pay or at prices that clubs aren't willing to do business at, or that we are going around trying to sign players but without the crucial sign off needed from the owners to actually get the deals done. Our reputation for doing business with must be in the gutter. Fitting when owned and run by people who belong there but have ended up in positions of wealth and power

Precisely. Blows the FFP fanatics out of the water together with those who suggest higher ticket prices needed to cover losses.

Anyone who goes to Preston on that Sunday at 12pm will see the impact of Sky. Rather than 5500 Rovers fans there and a raucous atmosphere there will be 3000 odd and a tepid atmosphere. Rather than a full Deepdale there will be 5000+ empty seats. Clubs aren't bothered because it's all about the Sky money and they simply assume fans will tolerate whatever scheduling they come up with. I think as time goes by less and less will put up with it and ultimately they will kill the golden goose. The people facilitating it right here right now will justify it on the balance sheet and will be long gone by the time the true damage becomes clear.

£26 million from Ash Phillips, Kaminski and Adam Wharton since this time last year should have given us some money, but already it seems that has been forgotten about. So I doubt another £4-5 million for Raya is going to make an ounce of difference. Whether we bring in £1 million, £10 million or another £20 million this summer I suspect the budget for fees is the same - very little - and on the wages front at the very most we can replace like for like so outgoings first then incomings to fill the void.

I really believe that Waggott just comes out with what he thinks people want to hear as and when he's under pressure or the spotlight. I don't think he cares whether it is true or not, he doesn't think anyone will bother pulling him up on it and just assumes people will forget or that if they do remember it will be too late for anything to happen. So when put on the spot about the owners funding 'issues' last year he'll have said the bare minimum designed to get the pressure off his back and appear positive to the fans. That's what he's always done. Said very little but what he has said cleverly designed to protect his masters from any hassle, criticism or grief. So now when we are thinking about whether he was being accurate, truthful or sincere back last year or many months ago it isn't worth getting too hung up on. He's a proven liar but to be fair he probably knows a lot less than you'd expect a CEO to know. I bet he is just given a budget to work to and he'll be lucky to get wind of the owners issues a few times a year. Then when the only interrogation you get all year round is the Telegraph, Radio Lancashire, club media and the fans forum every few months it becomes pretty easy to blag your way through.

I think here we just see the inconsistencies and nuances of Venky ownership. Too many different ideas and decision makers. I firmly believe that the reason Mowbray was able to quickly establish himself as the dominant power at the club was because straight after relegation in 2017 he jumped on a plane to Pune and met with Desai and husband. As with Kean and Bowyer that secured him a contract extension and by Venky standards a hefty transfer and wage budget. This is because they will grant such face-to-face requests and those two are the ultimate controllers of funds. For that reason Mowbray was as safe as houses for 5 years and was never, ever, going to get sacked or replaced until his contract expired. Results, performances, progress, all totally immaterial as with Kean. I'm not comparing the two blokes as I think Kean to be despicable whereas Mowbray a well meaning and competent manager albeit very frustrating at times. But similar patterns in their job security and links to the top dogs in India. After Mowbray finally left I think and suspect that the top 2 took a back seat and left the next decision to a combination of Waggott, Pasha and Balaji (the more time that goes by I suspect it was less to do with Waggott and more others). This is why we get something more resembling a modern, professional, forward thinking structure with a plan behind it, but totally hamstrung by a lack of serious funding created by virtue of the top 2 owners having no involvement in it and not having that personal link to the management. I think they tried to overcome this problem in summer 2023 by attempting to set up a meeting for Broughton and JDT to go to India to meet the top 2. Clearly after a positive first season and concerns about budgets this was an attempt to persuade the top 2 to relinquish funds to support JDT who was getting restless and had offered to leave. But for one reason or another that meeting never occurred, no money comes through and inevitably he leaves. In the chaos of February I think the Eustace appointment was similar to the Mowbray one in 2017 - simply turning to an out of work bloke with a reasonable reputation from elsewhere and hoping he can firefight. The difference this time around is that Eustace hasn't had the India jolly, so isn't going to be armed with a hefty transfer kitty. Instead he's going to have to work with peanuts like the other non-India visitors Lambert, Coyle and JDT got. All boils down to technically having 3/4 different owners with different plans, ideas and financial capabilities, ultimately the proper serious money being in the control of Desai and husband, those two refusing to engage in the process unless people go out to India and wait to meet them, and between all that people like Waggott and Pasha with their own opinions, wishes, feelings and power struggles to win.

Another exit for cash where there wasn't a sudden inexplicable breakdown in dealing with the administrative requirements. Funny that. Only happens when big wages and a fee needs to be paid out.... Likewise perfectly able to commit to outgoings at this 'early' stage in the window but we are being drilled by the Telegraph not to expect incomings for a while, something about the Euros etc.

Something that really, really irritated me this week was reading the Travis article on the club website https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2024/july/02/eustace--trav-better-following-his-tractor-boys-experience/ Within there it talks about how he helped Ipswich to promotion to the PL for the first time in 22 years and about how that loan will have helped him and how it will have been a great experience and it even comes with a photo of him in an Ipswich shirt celebrating promotion. These people are just totally shameless aren't they? I've still not fully digested the fact that we bundled him out the back door in the first week of January (club captain) to a league rival. I still find it difficult to digest that clubs such as Ipswich can come through League One and straight through to the Premier League under bright and ambitious management. Meanwhile they reduce this club further and further every season , falling further and further behind such clubs all the time. But for Rovers to now pretend that this diabolical maneuver was a positive decision for the club and player, that it will somehow benefit Rovers, that we are supposed to tolerate this sort of thing, plastering photos over our own website of our captain celebrating Ipswich's promotion last season whilst we limped our way to survival. Simply incredible to me that anyone employed by Rovers can even talk about it with a straight face. Scandalous. They need to be working out a way to emulate the mighty Ipswich not acting grateful that our captain has benefited from their promotion when in reality it was nothing more than a sinister money saving scheme.

I've never known a club so poor and weak at handling its assets or dealing with these situations. Rothwell, Lenihan, Diaz, Nyambe - you'd have thought after those debacles costing tens of millions of pounds that heads would have rolled or serious lessons learned. It seems not. We're gearing up for more of the same with Gallagher and Dolan, who like them or loathe them are two of the few players we have remaining who can attract serious interest from rival Championship clubs. We seem to be pinned into a corner whereby we don't want to lose or sell these people at the right time, but are totally incapable or unwilling to extend their terms. It is obvious why we aren't doing the latter - drastic Venky cuts make it almost impossible to offer terms to players that are appropriate and other clubs will offer far better - the question is why we don't sell before this point and I suspect the answer is because they know that even with some cash in from those sales we aren't going to be able to source as good or better because none of it will be reinvested and the wages will never be re-allocated. Once upon a time they could successfully lay the blame at the door of greedy players and agents but I've come to the conclusion that they aren't the problem here, far from it, and it is the actions of the club, or lack of action of the club, that is forcing these situations to develop and players to look elsewhere. It's happening far too frequently for it to be anything else.