Maharan

Just now, RoyMac5 said:

Just heard that on SSN. Do they get a stadium too?

I’d assume so

Apparently Southampton have just agreed a sale to a Serbian bloke for £100 million 

6 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Sell the printer sell the lawnmower but you can’t force a human being to sign for another club if they don’t want to 

Agree that you cannot force a player to sign elsewhere, but if you put yourself in the shoes of a creditor, you’d expect the administration team to be making every effort to persuade that player that it’s in the best interests of the club (long Term) for them to accept a move. 
 

I know where your coming from, but I just think we need to be mindful that the fan’s interests may not fully align with the mandate given to the administration team. 

3 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

You still can’t force a player to sign for another club - wouldn’t it be lovely to hear them saying that if it was tried and they didn’t want to, I mean would you want to sign for Blackpool for £100,000 or Preston for £80,0000 

Fora fan yes, but for a creditor, no! 
we still don’t know what (or if) any deal with HMRC says. It could include a provision that the club make every effort to repay as much as possible through the sale of assets, and the clubs only tangible assets are…

10 minutes ago, angieram said:

Whilst I agree this makes sense with regards to the match itself, surely the number of people taking public or shared transport to and from the venues, plus the copious drinking in overcrowded pubs and concourses has to be factored in? 

I have always felt my home matchday experience at least is fairly low risk as we arrive by private car, don't go to the pub and spend a bare minimum of time in the concourse. 

But for many that "matchday experience " is very different. 

I think that’s a really good point. The risk probably comes from the whole day experience. 
I’m not advocating any moves to play games behind closed doors, but it doesn’t really look good if you’re attempting to restrict social gatherings in some settings, but allowing tens of thousands to gather in sports venues. I think it’s looking gloomy I’m afraid 

28 minutes ago, Amberram said:

The Cardiff game was off anyway and Swansea  are playing in England.

Has that made the decision easier?

There are a couple of big rugby games planned for Boxing Day, which will now be played behind closed doors. Politically that would probably have been a tougher decision than the football I suspect. 

13 minutes ago, Crewton said:

On past record, not until the horse has bolted. 

I saw a report regarding research on transmission earlier today and it suggested that large, well ventilated venues are fairly low down on the risk register : smaller, enclosed spaces where people are closer together are the highest risk. Not that I expect the government to take any notice of the science. 

 

Don’t disagree, but I guess it’s down to the perception of allowing tens of thousands to gather, especially if they are planning on further restrictions in other sectors. 
 

im not saying I disagree or agree, just thought I’d let the forum know 

Games in Wales to be played behind closed doors from the 26th. I wouldn’t be surprised to see England following suit.

10 minutes ago, StrawHillRam said:

FEFL don’t seem to give a flying duck about health and safety of their members. they  and their pathetic rules are not fit for purpose in this day and age

I'm not sure what more you expect the EFL to do in this scenario? 

55 minutes ago, r_wilcockson said:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/59672468

Ah ha.. Is this the new speak for the dreaded vote of confidence from the board? 

That said, I'm not sure why Rooney would be linked. He's hardly set the world on fire in terms of results. I know it's not been an easy ride, but I'm not sure he's done enough to turn heads

Is this not just an agreement that the creditors agree with Administrators proposals, set out in the earlier document? 

23 minutes ago, Ram Logan Josh said:

I'm going to the Cardiff game (2 consecutive away games for first time ever - very fractional fan!).  I'm way over age 16... The Welsh govt seems to have been a bit stricter on Covid measures throughout the pandemic - anyone know if they've announced any extra measures?

Cheers

RLJ

 

Nothing else yet in Wales. Likely to be something, but not in time to affect the Cardiff game

22 minutes ago, EnigmaRam said:

I was listening, and they specifically said over 18’s and it was in writing on the big board. However I can’t see anything on the site that specifies an age.

Anyone know for sure whether there’s an age limit or not?

NHS Wales Covid pass is age 16 and above. 

edit; (if you're worried about the Cardiff game!)

Bluebirds 2-1 Rams

Aiden Flint OG for Derby

19 minutes ago, one_chop said:

Not being pessimistic but my guess is this,

 

Fire sale January 

All bidders pull out by March

Liquidation at the end of season if not before. 

17 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

What is your pessimistic viewpoint?

The worst case scenario is that all bidders pull out before the end of January

23 minutes ago, Yani P said:

Rooney has said multiple times ..no player leaves unless he wants him to leave..and he has had assurances from the Administrators that no player has to be sold in January to provide funding..so I'm really struggling with the Armageddon posts in this thread..have I missed anything apart from BS clickbait nonsense stories?

Do you honestly believe that there won't be significant sales in January? I don't mean that in an aggressive or narky way, I just don't see any other outcome. The club is losing money even if there is just a short delay in the sale of the club, then the books will need to be balanced somehow.

Of course Rooney is saying no players will be sold without his say so. What else is he supposed to say?

51 minutes ago, ramboy63 said:

Everything you say is spot on and we are in a dire situation,Come January the players will go for a fraction of what we would normally expect to get,forget that the administrators are doing there best for the club they will cash in if and when we get clubs come knocking its how these things work.If its to save the club in the end then so be it ,were a League 1 side now in all but name already

Absolutely agree. If the bids come in, al well and good if it helps secure the future the club, even if the fees are less than some would expect.

Get as much money in to reduce the debt, then (hopefully) start again. The level of debt is staggering and I wouldn't be surprised if it's giving potential buyers pause for thought. 

1 minute ago, Dimmu said:

As long as we stick with our centrebacks, I'm fine with selling some other prospect.

I think Davies and Jags are really going places, they both seem to have tons of potential. I'd just love it if they could fulfill it and reach their prime with us. 

Or if they do move on, at least make sure they've got a sell on clause..

1 hour ago, r_wilcockson said:

So Wayne, we can sell Knight and Bird or the club can risk liquidation, what do you say? 

Erm... 

Of course they'll be sold.

30 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Any potential deduction next season, the new owner, should have the resources to legally challenge.

On what grounds? If there is a penalty applied next season presumably it'll be for well established reasons. .

1 minute ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Re-read the original post. Because of delays in the sale, some believe we will need to sell to cover those costs. It wouldn't be about maximising funds to pay creditors, but to see us through until a point where a new owner comes in to cover costs or we're ran at a profit.

Okay, yeah, I see your point, and I had lost site of the original post. I'm not sure personally the two issues can be separated that easily, but I accept I missed the point somewhat. 

A quick change of ownership makes all this immaterial though, so that's the hope.. 

3 minutes ago, sage said:

for those running out of contract yes.

I repeat, it would be madness to sell a young player on a low wage unless it was to bring in a substantial fee. 

For instance offloading Lawrence Jozwiak and Marshall to reduce wages is part of the battle and if we were offered £5m for Knight £2m for Bird £1.5m for Buchanan and £1m for Sibley, it would only make sense to sell Knight. It would be enough to see us through till the end of the season.  

You're working on the assumption that the aim of the administrators is to just get through to the end of the season. If you look at it as though their aim is to maximise funds to pay creditors, be it to lower the overall debt to facilitate a sale or otherwise, then things look a lot less rosy. 

I don't know if the current squad would compete in League 1 to be honest, but it's immaterial because the current squad won't look anything like the one that would start next season. 

It's going to be tough regardless of who's around though. Winning (and losing) does become a bit of a habit, and if next season starts slowly, then it's going to be very difficult to turn it around. 

2 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

I personally feel that will be the outcome. 

Even the most optimistic of people should be slightly alarmed at the administrators shutting up shop to interviews. They had no problem going on Talksport when touting us for a sale, now we get tactical replies with no real substance on social media.

The constant delay in naming a preffered bidder is clearly buying time/stalling in the hope HMRC magically bend over and change their minds.

There is still the chance we survive this, albeit as a league 1 club with a 15 point deduction next season.

I would love Quantuma to tell me I'm wrong, I would absolutely love it.

I agree. 

I can't see any scenario where there isn't significant depatures in January, be it to satisfy as much of the outstanding debt as possible to enable a sale, or to satisfy HMRC that the club is making every effort to pay as much of the outstanding tax as is possible before a deal can be struck. 

8 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Actually even the St John Ambulance thing you can't just decide I wil pay that in full  because they are nice people but not the other creditors. Giving preference to them rather than HMRC would be dodgy too.

Obviously we all think you should pay your bills. For whatever reason and COVID is certainly one of the a big reasons  these bills went unpaid.

It's the fans who get punished if Derby go under. Not Mel morris. Maybe if we had a licencing system for owners that would be different. But we don't.  I see no reason to punish the fans for any wrongdoing by past owners.

 

 

The problem is if there was no penalty levied against the club then I suspect there would be owners up and down the country seriously considering walking away to avoid their liabilities.