Chris_D

we haven't spent 300k on an appeal

we haven't spent 300k on an appeal

we haven't spent 300k on an appeal

they have been agreed by the club

Because this season is done for us. I honestly wouldn't care in the slightest if they started a raffle before the games for fans to have 90 minutes of Championship football for a laugh. 
The players have an opportunity to go elsewhere that are going to be out of contract anyway will bring in some money where they otherwise wouldn't. Although, I understand the academy lads are different as we receive compensation regardless of their contract status. Also, these lads have stuck around and played hard for the club despite all the nonsense that's been out of their hands. If they have an opportunity to get a long-term deal elsewhere that provides financial and professional stability then we have a duty of care to them. 
They could easily get injured playing in nothing games for us that could have a significant detrimental impact on their careers going forward. 

I doubt we could have ever used it tbh
Vydra was 18/19 (Lampard season). Johnson, Butterfield, Blackman let go at the start of 19/20 so a big amortisation hit is from them.
It might seem excessive but that's what the numbers available suggest.
17/18 was £7.2m P&S profit, the last year of confirmed figures. Minus £40m stadium profit, a £19m increase in amortisation costs (confirmed in IDC hearing), approx £10m reduction in wage wage, slight variances in sponsorship and profit on player sales...
£44m could be an underestimation in all seriousness.

You're going to need to show some working. Our matchday income in 2017/18 was £9.1m. Our total revenue, including eg broadcast rights, was £29m. (In passing, our wages were £47m.) I'd like to know how exactly we get to £20m lost through COVID but even if we do, it's a fraction of the money we've lost or the debts we've accumulated. It's a factor obviously but it's absolutely not the sole cause of our problems.
It's absolutely fine for us to appeal the administration penalty! I'd love us to appeal and win. The club however has agreed an adjournment. Are we claiming they are doing this despite having an ironclad case? Sacrificing 12 points to bring forward an additional penalty of nine? It makes no sense. They know they are not going to win that appeal. 
You've convinced yourself we would win the administration appeal and you're now constructing a huge conspiracy theory around it. There's a much simpler explanation. The administrators know they were unlikely to win, that the finances are a mess, and that if they can leverage their minimal 'threat' of legal action to at least close off the threat of multiple points deductions when our accounts are calculated like every other club, then so be it.
If this was any other club, all this would be obvious. Since it's our club, it's painful. But it's true all the same. 

Isn’t it the case that we received a 100k fine *and* were required to restate the accounts and P&S calculations for prior years, and it’s on the basis of these new accounts/P&S that this new points deduction is being applied?

Isn’t it the case that we received a 100k fine *and* were required to restate the accounts and P&S calculations for prior years, and it’s on the basis of these new accounts/P&S that this new points deduction is being applied?

don't think that's true, Professor Pope (an accountant) at the LAP did not think our policy was FRS 102 compliant (not sure what FS104 is)

don't think that's true, Professor Pope (an accountant) at the LAP did not think our policy was FRS 102 compliant (not sure what FS104 is)

We've lost 9 points from winning positions and gained zero from losing positions, resulting in minus 9 points. Those 9 points would have lifted us out of the drop zone, even with the 12 points penalty. Ignoring the 12 point penalty it would be enough for us to be in the play off positions and if my auntie had.................

when did the EFL say this about the sufficient guarantees? be interested how that was phrased / when they said it.

when did the EFL say this about the sufficient guarantees? be interested how that was phrased / when they said it.

they are to be repaid by 2024

they will have shown they have access to £5m, per requirements set by admins to see deal docs  no requirement to have shown they have full funds to purchase the club

They said initially they would need short term funding to get through the next three months: 
https://www.thebusinessdesk.com/eastmidlands/news/2052088-administrators-say-Derby-county-have-95-chance-of-rescue
“Jackson said the cash situation as the club is “extremely tight”. He added: “There is cash, but not enough to keep the club going for three months. We’re looking to take some short-term funding, and we’re in discussion with funders. We’ll be continuing with football fixtures.”

They said initially they would need short term funding to get through the next three months: 
https://www.thebusinessdesk.com/eastmidlands/news/2052088-administrators-say-Derby-county-have-95-chance-of-rescue
“Jackson said the cash situation as the club is “extremely tight”. He added: “There is cash, but not enough to keep the club going for three months. We’re looking to take some short-term funding, and we’re in discussion with funders. We’ll be continuing with football fixtures.”

They said initially they would need short term funding to get through the next three months: 
https://www.thebusinessdesk.com/eastmidlands/news/2052088-administrators-say-Derby-county-have-95-chance-of-rescue
“Jackson said the cash situation as the club is “extremely tight”. He added: “There is cash, but not enough to keep the club going for three months. We’re looking to take some short-term funding, and we’re in discussion with funders. We’ll be continuing with football fixtures.”

They said initially they would need short term funding to get through the next three months: 
https://www.thebusinessdesk.com/eastmidlands/news/2052088-administrators-say-Derby-county-have-95-chance-of-rescue
“Jackson said the cash situation as the club is “extremely tight”. He added: “There is cash, but not enough to keep the club going for three months. We’re looking to take some short-term funding, and we’re in discussion with funders. We’ll be continuing with football fixtures.”

Just been re-reading this topic and I'm just astonished there are those still willing to either defend the bloke or offer up apologetics for him. All of the 'achievements' come to naught if there isn't a club at the end of it and that's exactly what could happen.  As a best case scenario he's loaded up the club with a mountain of debt that cannot be maintained, pretty much guaranteed our relegation to the third tier for only the third time in our history and has arguably irreparably damaged our reputation in the footballing community.

Mel was a custodian of the club and absolutely nothing more, his job was to ensure the survival, maintenance, and prosperity of the club and in that he's absolutely 100% failed. Instead of acting as a custodian, he increasingly acted like the club was his train set with lavish unsustainable spending and big name appointments. None of us knew the true financial state of the club only he and Mr Pearce did it seems, and an owners job is to know when to put the brakes on and when not to. The last thing an owner should do is gamble the future of an institution on the hope you'll get promotion- it's exactly that type of thinking that Risdale had with Leeds that all but bankrupted them in the end. 

I won't even mention the completely disgraceful behaviour by Mel towards the staff and fans keeping us all in the dark during this period and his decision to pull the plug. I somehow doubt he'll end up selling his house or is wandering the street with a tin cup in the near future. 

I'll bite - even though I normally ignore your more obvious arsey comments.
Square pegs? He's expecting both Jags & Curtis to be ball playing centre-halves - not something that they are naturals at....He's picking Roos for his ball-playing ability - something he may show in training, but something he's incapable of doing in pressure situations.....He's playing Bird & Shinnie next to each other which, as we've seen over many games, limits both of them....He's playing Morrison to give us quality going forward, but Morrison is then having to drop back to in front of the centre-halves to get the ball because Bird & Shinnie aren't doing the basics as CDMs...Last night he played Sibley on the right which dramatically limited his effectiveness....He played Tom Lawrence who at times looks more like a square peg than a professional footballer - always on his heels and more often looking for a fight rather than looking to hurt the opposition with his play....
As far as shots on target, maybe we did have as many as they did - who scored the most goals and got the 3 points?
 

I thought they had a very interesting tactic, at times they pushed both up strikers in a diagonal line to our CB with the ball.
One striker blocked the central passing option to Morrison and the other blocked the channel option to bird. Their wide player then sat on our FB. This left us with a pass to the other CB, back to Roos or punt it.
We are too predictable and don’t mix our tactics up when things aren’t working. The only thing we change is dropping Morrison deeper to get on the ball (but they stick Chong on him) this dragged us even further back and broke up the link between the midfield and attack.
The sad thing is we can play some nice stuff and we are a more technical team than Brum…………sadly we are no where near as effective.

Sale or return not pay up front and Derby should have tickets four weeks before fixtures (if we’ve bothered to order them at least five weeks before as rules state):
 
34.3.2 Clubs are required to sell tickets for their away matches if required to do so by the Home Club and similarly Home Clubs are required to supply tickets for their Home Matches to the Away Club for sale by the Away Club to its supporters if so requested by the Away Club. These tickets are to be made available on a sale or return basis and must be ordered by the Away Club at least five weeks before the League Match to which they relate. The Home Club must deliver those tickets to the Away Club at the latest four weeks before the League Match to which they relate. Where any match is arranged at shorter notice the above steps shall be taken as soon as is reasonably practicable. Visiting Supporters should also have the same opportunity to take advantage of pre-booking discounts that apply to home supporters.
34.3.3  For League Matches only, the Away Club shall be entitled to a commission representing 5 (five) per cent of the aggregate sales (exclusive of VAT) of tickets sold on behalf of the Home Club, unless otherwise agreed between the Clubs. The Away Club shall submit a VAT invoice, in respect of the commission due, to the Home Club within five working days of the date of the match taking place.

I think we need to get answers to every point on this, including the details behind each one. Why are we the only club in the entire football league default in payments to the HMRC. Do regulation 16.2, 16.3 and P&S non-submission of audited accounts really relate to purely amortisation or is there more to it? 

This is as of this morning.