@healeynut62 If there was absolute clarity from Bill that they have no desire to own any part of K7 then, as the lawyer indicated in the Briefing, there would be reason to move forward. But Bill is claiming ownership of the parts of the boat that they have fabricated and restored and this claim is rejected by the RM. As others on this forum have pointed out, until that is resolved I don't see how anything moves forward. Either Bill puts ownership of the restoration elements on the table for discussion or it goes to court at which point Bill will lose out - either because he wins and gets to remove those parts he put on the boat, or he loses and the boat goes to the RM, and there is no role for BBP or Bill. At the moment Bill physically has the boat, but and, as he says in the briefing, he is looking for RM to put something 'tasty' on the table to bring him to it. I don't see RM doing anything accept waiting and then testing ownership in court. At that point, Bill loses. RM have identified other parties who have the skills to re-build and maintain the boat... I take no sides in this, and I would like to see a situation where ownership rests entirely with RM, but a role for the BBP in running and maintaining the boat is found and is binding for a minimum period.