MadAmster

Derby 3-1. Sibs.
I expect them to play their usual dark arts game. Time wasting from the off. Overly physical. Taking ages to take dead ball restarts. Falling over, poleaxed, when you look at them too hard.

Please don't take this personally. I am astounded that this question is still being asked. After everything that has been in the news, on the club website, on Twitter/X/FB over the past 2 years, all the plethora of threads on forums, that there are still people who, apparently, are unaware that clubs coming out of Administration have to keep to an agreed business plan in the first 2 seasons thereafter. The club writes the business plan, submit it to the EFL and they have to agree to it. If they don't agree, they will request changes. This is our 2nd season. We have to adhere to the plan WE wrote and the EFL agreed to.
This leads me to another point. I may be wrong but I doubt it. We may not exceed what is in the business plan, that's a fact. Last year's plan was based on 17K gates. We averaged >27K. I estimate that to mean we got around £6M more in than the plan budgeted on. We couldn't spend that on transfer fees, agent fees or wages. I am of the opinion we still have that "in the bank". We have a limited budget this year too. Wages "cap" is higher but not extravagant. Agent fees are allowed. Moderate transfer fees are allowed. Last year we were allowed to spend £8M. That figure is higher this season. Several people seem to be intimating that we are losing money and DC is having to pump millions into the club to keep it afloat. We aren't allowed to overspend. Therefore, I don't see (and that might be my fault) how DC will be having to pour millions into the club to keep it afloat when DCFC isn't allowed to spend more than it has and possibly less than that.

Me n er indoors were flying over for the Burton game. The move to Monday scuppered that, partially. She is now staying in NL. I'm flying in on the Saturday morning. Attending Burton Rugby Club former players lunch on the Saturday. Visiting friends on the Sunday. Match on the Monday and back to NL on the Tuesday before flying to Fuerteventura on the Thursday. I love this pensioner lark. 

Me n er indoors were flying over for the Burton game. The move to Monday scuppered that, partially. She is now staying in NL. I'm flying in on the Saturday morning. Attending Burton Rugby Club former players lunch on the Saturday. Visiting friends on the Sunday. Match on the Monday and back to NL on the Tuesday before flying to Fuerteventura on the Thursday. I love this pensioner lark. 

PP was owned by MM's Gellaw 202 company. DC bought the stadium from them/MM.  He then went about buying the club. Once in Admin, to buy the club he had to negotiate with Quantuma who were running the club for the Courts. Quantuma were charged with getting the best possible deal for the club's creditors. Mr Clowes paid around £28M for the club. That money went to pay off an agreed % of monies owed to the creditors. That is why the 2 deals were separate. It wasn't the same people selling...
DC (UK) Ltd now owns both the club and the Stadium.

This below is from the clowes announcement re the stadium purchase. It suggests they bought MM’s company, not the stadium itself (tho the wording is a bit strange)
 
If that’s right and the stadium owning company was later dissolved (in late 2022?), then the stadium would presumably have been hived up to Clowes Dev (U.K.) Ltd after the purchase. That would make sense because  at that stage the transaction was intra group so free of taxes  
The lease that was in place when the stadium owning company was purchased would simply have ceased to exist when the lessee and lessor became the same person (ie on the hive up). So no rental payable
 
Clowes Developments would like to formally thank all parties involved in the deals to date.  Collectively we have paved the way for a positive outcome for the future of Derby County Football Club.  We would like to take the opportunity to thank our respective teams of professional advisors who have helped us to successfully purchase the Company that owned Pride Park Stadium, secure the loan agreement and confirm the submission of a bid to purchase the Club.

One could be excused for thinking that there are one or two posters who ignore facts, cherry pick words out of context in order to exude the opposite viewpoint. If I get to the point where it's getting to me, I ignore the thread.
Never allow anyone, be they sensible, an eejit or just a WUM, to live rent free in your head. They're not worth it and you deserve better. Draw your own boundaries and stick to them. It's good for your own well being.

He bought the club as he loves DCFC as much as we do. 

If there's no pro club to play in it, the stadium would be bulldozed and the buyer would pay whatever the value of the land is. When you look at what PP cost to build, add in inflation, take away whatever depreciation due to age, add in L1 football and just above £20M is probably about right. Back in the PL, both the club and the stadium would be worth more than DC paid. So, not bold, just massaging figures and thoughts and coming to a possible value.

The Pride Park deal is thought be worth around £23.5m Source thebusinessdesk.com/eastmidlands/news/2060386-developer-acquires-pride-park-and-announces-takeover-bid
I know MM paid £80M and £23.5M is a "song" in comparison but £23.5M (I'd always thought he'd paid £22M) is about the right price.

For those who weren't there...  
 

He bought the club as he loves DCFC as much as we do. 

For those who weren't there...  
 

The title of the thread reads.... You are a legend Mr Clowes. Now, please plan for the next stage
If there is to be a "next stage", Mr Clowes will have the direction of the "next stage" firmly in his head and probably on paper as well. In which case he has already planned for the "next stage". Thinking there isn't a mid term plan in place is, IMO, disparaging towards David Clowes.
IMO, any next stage will require:
1. Promotion to the SBC and staying there the first season otherwise we won't be attractive to prospective buyers
2. Any new buyer having to commit, in the contract, to keep the club financially viable and insisting on the same when they sell it on
 

Sheer genius!

Never thought about it but it's likely he couldn't do a worse job than the last 5 incumbents...

You're only as good as your last game. On today's play Sibs at #10

Is the curse mandatory or can you accept the award but refuse the curse?
Ian Evatt has won it for the 2nd consecutive month and it's not affected Bolton yet...

Well, not the best of displays but 3 points is 3 points.

55% possession, 13 shots to their 8, 9 on target to their 2 are the stats. However, this game has me worried. A better side would have probably beaten us. So often they got past us on our right. Exposing Ward's defensive frailty?. Less fortunate on our left as they had little success there. Some success over and behind the centre halves. They had a succession of chances that they simply couldn't take. One, at 0-0, was one I'd have been angry with myself about, the ball hitting the non-striking leg and being cleared.

We simply can't give that many decent chances away and get away with it.

Wonderful finish from Sibs. Well worked NML goal on the break and idem ditto with Barks' goal. 3 good goals.

The red? Not seen it from the aerial angle Shaun Barker and Owen Bradley saw it from but that view convinced both of them that it was an elbow and thus a deserved red. Down to 10 men they had way too many chances to score and failed.

You're only as good as your last game. On today's play Sibs at #10

Well, not the best of displays but 3 points is 3 points.

55% possession, 13 shots to their 8, 9 on target to their 2 are the stats. However, this game has me worried. A better side would have probably beaten us. So often they got past us on our right. Exposing Ward's defensive frailty?. Less fortunate on our left as they had little success there. Some success over and behind the centre halves. They had a succession of chances that they simply couldn't take. One, at 0-0, was one I'd have been angry with myself about, the ball hitting the non-striking leg and being cleared.

We simply can't give that many decent chances away and get away with it.

Wonderful finish from Sibs. Well worked NML goal on the break and idem ditto with Barks' goal. 3 good goals.

The red? Not seen it from the aerial angle Shaun Barker and Owen Bradley saw it from but that view convinced both of them that it was an elbow and thus a deserved red. Down to 10 men they had way too many chances to score and failed.

Well, not the best of displays but 3 points is 3 points.

55% possession, 13 shots to their 8, 9 on target to their 2 are the stats. However, this game has me worried. A better side would have probably beaten us. So often they got past us on our right. Exposing Ward's defensive frailty?. Less fortunate on our left as they had little success there. Some success over and behind the centre halves. They had a succession of chances that they simply couldn't take. One, at 0-0, was one I'd have been angry with myself about, the ball hitting the non-striking leg and being cleared.

We simply can't give that many decent chances away and get away with it.

Wonderful finish from Sibs. Well worked NML goal on the break and idem ditto with Barks' goal. 3 good goals.

The red? Not seen it from the aerial angle Shaun Barker and Owen Bradley saw it from but that view convinced both of them that it was an elbow and thus a deserved red. Down to 10 men they had way too many chances to score and failed.

My guess is that he saw the methodology he chose to use from 2015 as a way of making exceeding FFP limits more difficult. He was right. He also told the EFL he was going to do it. It wasn't until 2019 when that Smoggie chap got upset that they decided to "investigate". In the meantime they had accepted 4 years of accounts using that amortisation method. If you tell the EFL you intend to change and then do so and they don't complain, you can be forgiven for thinking there isn't a problem...
It's also not impossible that, without the 9 point deduction which we wouldn't have had if the appeal hadn't found that catch-all clause. No 9 point deduction, maybe MM doesn't put us into admin... and who knows what would have happened then?
 

You're only as good as your last game. On today's play Sibs at #10

Yes, fully agree with that Mad though apparently we could and should have won by 5 or 6.
Amazing how some see things differently.