Maharan

Just now, RoyMac5 said:

I agree there is little concrete information out amongst the fans, but I still wonder about the 'against statute' bit from Admin. Difficult to see that being based around the scenario imagined by BAWT, but who knows.

Agreed, and to be honest, I don’t think the administration team’s statement was particularly well worded. Whether that’s intentional or a reflection of the situation is beyond me. 
 

I do wonder if there is confusion between what is necessary to exit administration from a legal perspective, and what is required to retain a place in the league according to EFL rules / terms and conditions. I just don’t know.

7 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

None of it is necessarily true either.

Indeed, but it’s certainly more plausible than some of the other things being mentioned. 
 

as I’ve said many times though, I generally know poo all, so nobody should form an opinion based on what I say. 

1 minute ago, Bald Eagle's Barmy Army said:

This really couldn't have come at a worse time now could it. 

I do think Everton will want to appoint somebody soon though so they have time in the transfer window. Hopefully they already have a manager ready to go and is announced in the next 20 minutes. 

I agree, a sensible club would have lined up somebody already. 

48 minutes ago, Carnero said:

An excellent explanation of where we seem to be at, courtesy of Black & White Together:

https://www.dcfcbawt.org/post/efl-quantuma-s-position-here-s-bawt-s-ian-redfern-s-view

I agree, that is the best and most plausible explanation of the situation. 
cheers for sharing 

11 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I'll repeat, why would they think the EFL wouldn't stick by what they said before and tell Boro to keep out of it? Plus how much more positive than having a PB can you be?

So if you know about administration where do the EFL stand on refusing to let the Club exit when we have a PB lined up?

Do you not think they should have checked? 

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

No-one seems to have an answer ask another question then. Maybe why are the EFL ignoring their own rules and regs?

Yep, don’t know the answer to that either. 

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

And you know that how? 

I don’t. It was a question rather than a statement,hence the question mark 

14 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

"It will be for the Admins to conduct any defence of any claims brought against #dcfc""

 

So why won't EFL let the Admins deal with the claim as they see fit? 

Perhaps because they are just ignoring the claims rather than attempting to resolve the issue? 

40 minutes ago, Bald Eagle's Barmy Army said:

My guess is that as soon as the transfer window closes, the takeover will be allowed to go through. 
 

We can still stay up without any additional players being added. 
 

Starting with 3 points today COYR ⚽️⚽️

I’ve thought this for a few weeks to be honest. Once the window shuts I wouldn’t be surprised to see the claims disappear 

8 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

A new owner has nothing to buy apart from the players - if they are sold/ given away there is literally nothing to buy !

That's not true. Let's be honest, if anyone is going to buy the club it's because it's a member of the football league. Players come and players go, so if a few are sold to bring the debt level down, then so be it. Losing our spot in the league would be much, much worse

5 minutes ago, DCFC27 said:

I know how this sounds but at this point it’s probably worth going nuclear. Admin release a statement saying no progress is being made, unless Wycombe and Bora drop their lawsuits or the EFL intervention the club goes into liquidation next week. 
Either they back off, we fall into liquidation or someone actually takes on the lawsuits. Either way we get an answer. 
IMO the admin have done their job, they have everyone around the table, the EFL and other clubs are stopping this so rather than death my a thousand cuts, lets just chop off the head or maybe escape last second. 
In business you have to make things happen, at the moment we’re just pussyfooting around and nothing is being done. You have to say it and follow through. 

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the claim from boro being dropped on the 1st February. 

0-2 blades.
Just too much going on in the background 

2 minutes ago, rammieib said:

Apart from they have given us the requirements under which we need to work with. Wage Cap etc. So their just interfering for the sake of it, without being privvy to the discussions actually happening.

The amazing thing for me is we are actually on the Preferred Bidder Announcement Day (I don't think it will happen though!) and as fans, we are actually no further down the line in knowing. Some think its Ashley, some think its Appleby.

I genuinely think it will come out through a media source before its officially announced. Why? Because the public will be the last to know and so many people will find out officially before us that it will be leaked.

There’s restrictions because the club is in administration. There are a lot of people not going to get the money they are owed by the club. Do you think it’s okay for us to continue as if nothing has happened? 

9 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

There are two issues IMO that the EFL are trying to engineer. A potential for us not to be able to par wages at end of Jan and add the 3 points suspended. To avoid this the club would have to sell players if the takeover can be delayed which the EFL are trying to do. We know from DC reports that the EFL expect punishments to result in relegation and suddenly this looks in doubt. 

Well surely if wages can’t be paid, then the 3 points should be applied. Isn’t that the point of a suspended sentence? 
If it’s a case that someone needs to be sold to pay wages, then isn’t that the right thing to do? 
 

im not sure there is some EFL conspiracy to delay any sale based on the telegraph story. It all seems like a non issue to me, but it’s been blown out of all proportion. 

14 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Don't overlook the need to submit all accounts up to and including the 19/20 season to the EFL by the end of the month

 

In their last season in the PL they made a £11.5m profit in the accounts. Using Gibsonomics (4 teams in playoffs so they had a 25% chance of going up), that equates to £2.875m. However, using the real probability of the going up via the playoffs (beating Leeds over 2 legs and Villa in the Final) it actually equates to £0.

The accounts by the end of the month was something I was going to ask about when I got around to it. @Ghost of Clough, you seem to be on top of some of the financials (as much as possible anyway), do you think we can expect further problems upon release? 

Cheers

Good news. Nothing personal Dave!

14 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It's 60% of typical football income, plus 100% of 'bonus' income (cup runs, player sales, etc). The owner 'donating' money via equity falls under the 2nd category.

Which makes a mockery of the whole thing doesn't it?! I'm not complaining, just find that a bit odd!

22 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

(I'm not an accountant proviso here, take with a pinch of salt etc etc...)

If the deal isn't an arms-length transaction (e.g. a Morris company selling to a Morris company), then the deal has to be done at 'market value' (i.e. valued by a 3rd party valuer in the case of property).  The only reason we were able to gain any profit from our deal was that the stadium was undervalued on our books at the time (having not been revalued for a while).  It was revalued from ~£40m to ~£80m, sold on, and we pocketed the difference.  Any other club where the stadiums real-world value is higher than it's current book value was free to do the same, as Villa and Wednesday (and maybe others?) did.

But if we were to buy it back (prior to going into admin), we would have had to sell it back for market value, which would basically have been for £80m again. So we gain nothing in that transaction in P/L terms (other than the stadium being back in our ownership, of course).  The same going forward, we could move it back to the other company, but it would be for very close to what we paid for it.

The only things that's changed now, is that it is an arms-length transaction. DCFC is 'owned' by the administrators, and the stadium by Morris, so he's free to sell it to us for whatever he likes, and his company will register the change in P/L (i.e. if he sells it back to us for £20m, he'll have to eat a ~£60m loss on it).  But from our point of view, there's no change, £20m cash goes out, a £20m asset comes in.  Of course we could in theory do the same trick, by moving our £20m asset to ourselves for it's true value of £80m, but that loophole has been closed by the EFL.

Erm… I think I follow, cheers! 

33 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Stamp duty for a start. Twice over.

So what's to stop a wealthy owner, to whom stamp duty represents a drop in the ocean, undertaking the exercise to completely bypass FFP? 

23 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

I don't think that affects FFP. We pay (e.g.) £20m, and a £20m asset appears on the books. There's no net change in profit/loss terms.

So you can (or could under previous rules?) sell your stadium to cover FFP losses, but the purchase price wouldn’t impact if the club bought it back? That can’t be right,surely? Can it?! If so, why wasn’t everyone doing it?

1 minute ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

I got a 30 day ban for calling Mel a buffoon on here when he was still the golden child and you just called the Wycombe chairman a numpty ?

Bloody good post though and echoes everything I'm thinking.

Not sure I am able to put my anger into words, if I tried I would just be smashing the keyboard to bits.

The way our club is being treated is similar to the Russia and Qatar world Cup bids, its so obvious, its staring everyone blatantly in the face, but everyone is so obsessed with what Chelsea and Britney are doing in Love Island they do nothing about it.

I know this will never happen, but Derby fans should rally other fans, because there will be other ones and start lobbying outside the EFL headquarters and get a bit of publicity. 

Love Island is on? Be right back...

5 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I’m fairly confident that a lot of the story must be a load of rubbish. I really can’t see how any clubs feel they have the right to go crying to the EFL because we haven’t sold players to them at the price they have offered especially as the transfer window is still open.

I would imagine it it did happen that and the EFL took their complaints seriously and challenged the administrators they would probably either say “we think the player is worth more and we think we can get a better price which would be better for the creditors” or “we expect to have a preferred bidder, with a business plan and agreed terms with creditors shortly (not imminently ?) which means the club can hold onto that player”

If any clubs genuinely do think they have the right to force a sale, or the EFL feel they can interfere with the administrators doing job then the world really has gone mad.

Absolutely. I can't understand why people are so annoyed by this, and the pitchforks are out for the EFL again. Yes, I understand the EFL are not popular, but this is just nonsense. 

Am I missing something here? I thought the article said several clubs had complained to the EFL about the administration team turning down offers, not that the EFL support them? I’d imagine they’ll ignore such protests surely? 
 

As some may have noticed, I’ve been fairly pessimistic about liquidation since day1, but honestly, I don’t think it’ll happen on the grounds of the cases brought by Borough and Wycombe. I have a feeling the boro case will be dropped on the 1st February. I’ve got no inside information, but I just get the feeling it’s a stalling tactic rather than an existential threat.

40 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

People need to read my posts ? 

The post below is an amazing (estimated) breakdown, which shows we made losses greater than £4m in more than just 3 seasons.
The final penalty was for 3 failed periods (2014-2017, 2016-2019 and 2017-2021), so 3 breaches. Based on precedent, those 3 failed periods should have seen us deducted 17 points.

Note, this was WITH the stadium sale included.

I was just going to suggest that someone read your previous posts on the matter!

3 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Just one of many stains,

The rest of the footballing world would soon move on, use us as a cautionary tale but otherwise shrug it off as something we brought on ourselves.

We'd be a footnote in history in relatively little time.

Yeah, I agree. Sad as it is.