curb

2 minutes ago, Ram1988 said:

Very true, but I will feel much more at ease once everything has been completed so we can get players signed on the dotted line.

Think of it as character building, although there’s a hell of a lot of building work to be done.

And just think, the longer it drags on, the sweeter the moment will be.

Or, the further we fall, the longer we’ll have to enjoy the climb back to Championship mediocrity.

or, well, you could just admit that this isn’t for you, and you could go off and do something less stressful, or less confusing.

I think that Rooney is a big factor in whether players stay or not, but also, and probably more important to them, is the togetherness as a group that we’ve seen. Shinnie wasn’t in tears because of the Ram on his chest, but because he was having to leave his mates.

28 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

9CK buying the stadium is not a mile away from the MM structure. I think people want the club to own it don’t they (or a subsidiary of the club) ?

CKs company will own the club, so if the stadium goes into that company then the club and stadium would be back together. 

5 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Come on now surely people only want it to happen because they want to know when get the fizz out the fridge or the whisky out in celebration. Unless CK is the biggest con man in history, this is done barring formalities. 
 

Ive just been going big for the last few days just in case anyway! ?

40 pints of home brew ready and waiting, come on Chris, get it done.

1 minute ago, kevinhectoring said:

 

And so begins the (glorious? ) reign of Kirch

(We knew he wouldn’t leave us in the lurch)

just 48 remaining hours must pass

Before Mel exits stage left on his ar$e

 

Our torment had it seemed gone on for ages

(This thread has more than fifteen hundred pages)

But now it’s done,  it’s just as q advised:

It’s gone so fast we’re pleasantly surprised

What tune?

1 hour ago, Gaspode said:

There used to be a factory by the A38 near Burton called Spun Concrete - I could never work out what Crete had done to deserve that....

I went there last week, and yes, I did.

4 hours ago, ariotofmyown said:

Any who were aware of the dire financial state of the club at the time, then enjoyed bouncing all the way to Wembley with Frank, but are now slagging of Mel for wreckless spending, are hypocrites.

We should have listened to the Snake Rowett at the time.

Perhaps Rowett was also told a bunch of lies when he joined? Then after one season, was then told there was no money and he'd have to sell everyone? The real Snake remained at Pride Park, ready to cause more carnage.

My crystal ball was being polished that week, that’s why I couldn’t see into the future. 

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It's pretty much down to your interpretation of 'reliably'. This should not be confused with accurately.

For example, you record how much water is leaking out of a pipe.
You measure the results 10 times and you get values ranging from 980ml to 1020ml.
Your friend measures the water 10 times. However, he gets values ranging from 240ml to 260ml.
In reality, the true measurement should have been 250ml. Your friend measure the water accurately and reliably. You may have been accurate, but you were still reliable.

The same principle was more or less applied to the amortisation policy. The club were reliably valuing players above their true value

FRS 102 states:
"Reliability: information is reliable when it is free from material error or bias"
"‘In many cases the cost or value of an item is known. In other cases it must be estimated. The use of reasonable estimates is an essential part of the preparation of financial statements and does not undermine their reliability"
In essence, the club using a systematic method to determine the values of players ensured the policy remained reliable.

The DC found the evidence provided by Pearce and Delve to be "consistent with the Club having been able to determine the pattern of its consumption of future economic benefits from its ownership of player registrations reliably".

The DC also stated that Blackman, Butterfield and Johnson leaving for free at the end of their contracts did not prove the policy to be unreliable. We can all state with relative confidence that the book values of those players were higher than reality, but it cannot be proven.

 

At the end of the day, every qualified and practicing accountant involved in the case believe the policy used was compliant. But a few lawyers had the final say and overruled their decision and there's nothing we can do about it.

My thoughts too, the word reliably is the one that makes it ambiguous.

If we bought Lawrence for 4 million on a four year contract then after 3 years we could still technically sell him for 4 million.

But as we know to our cost it could have been Anya bought for 4 million and sat in the reserves for 3 years on higher wages than anyone else is willing to pay him so after 3 years his value could be nothing.

Anyway, I asked that question about 10 mins before Lord Kirchner of Derbyshire made his announcement so hopefully we can put all that bo#&£@ks behind us and look to the future instead of whinging about the past.

Up the ducking good ole USA Rams

18 hours ago, The Baron said:

To me FRS 102 is pretty unequivocal on the issue. I did not prompt the EFL to make a rule, they rejected my letter, and I also worked with the DCFC defence team in relation to the charges

Could you point us to the paragraph in FRS 102 that says our amortisation policy was in breach of it as opposed to a straight line policy?

Ive scanned through it and couldn’t find anything, but then it’s over 400 pages, so I could have missed it.

I would think that a points deduction on return to the Championship would be more of a deterrent than a fine in chasing the dream, because it would make it harder to become a yo-yo club when they come back down.

43 minutes ago, The Baron said:

That is within the rules. 

So was our amortisation policy until a few months ago.

I don’t see why the stadium sale is of any concern to the EFL or any of its members, apart from acknowledging that we will still be able to play football there. Once the stadium was sold to an external company and not owned as an asset by the club, then it’s no business of anyones if it gets sold to another external party.

Any lease agreed is between the new owner of the football club company and the new owner of the stadium, it has nothing to do with any previous evaluation.

As a side thought, if Lord Kirchner buys the stadium for £80m off the new stadium owner sometime in the future, can we write that cost off against FFP?  ?

3 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

What I don't understand is why people around Eric Steel haven't pulled him up on his continued use of the word NONCE when he means nous. 

You can’t criticise Eric, you might as well slag off Jesus. 

29 minutes ago, Oldben said:

Knowing which battles are worth fighting, is wisdom.

Making the efl our enemy, when they set the rules of the game is foolhardy.

We are better of leaving this to the politicians, and hopefully there will be an independent regulator.

Other clubs might criticise Derby for recent events, but that doesn't matter, because one day it will be there turn to ask for help and Derby might not be in their corner.

What is coming has to better for the club, than what the club has just been through.

 

 

The trouble is, the rules that nearly destroyed us, and will probably take us a decade to get over, are already being changed so that other clubs who get into similar difficulty won’t be punished like we were.

I reckon that what peed off other fans the most is that through all this BS we mobilised all avenues of influence, continued to support our club, and still had a great time doing it, while they know that if it was their club they’d have been sat in the pub crying in their beer. 
Up the ducking Rams. 

There’s going to be a party in Crete tonight.

Up the ducking Rams

Gerry Daly, Liam Brady, Trevor Brooking, although it was a long time ago, and my memory might be a bit skewed.

31 minutes ago, Topram said:

How long does this carry on? Each week carrying on the exclusivity? It’s been 8 months now, so frustrating and so hard to concentrate on anything! 

As long as I takes. Is there any point in cutting it off now it’s supposedly close? 
We’d have to start again from scratch. 

16 minutes ago, I know nuffin said:

That is one of the mysteries of the stadium. Back in December CK in that tweet that he was very annoyed in claimed that MM did Motown the stadium. He must have been wrong but that's what he posted

It wasn’t the Supreme deal he was hoping for?

It made Stevie Wonder?

etc etc etc

Just now, Ghost of Clough said:

It's 3 points for any period of unpaid wages 

Late for May and June would be just 3 points in total.

There’s always one that spoils the joke with facts ?

2 hours ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/derby-county-facing-fresh-points-deduction-threat-ahead-of-2022-23-season/

So 3 each for May and June, then -15 to exit administration.

At least we won’t have to change the words to any songs.

42 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

In footballing terms, MM is asked to gift CK 15 points next season. Might be as much as £1m per point !! 

No,

After already ‘gifting’ CK relegation to league 1, MM is being asked to give back the -15 that the debts he ran up have caused.

55 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Sorry to really hammer this home, but...

Ignore any misgivings for MA as an owner for a moment.

The facts are:

The structure of CK's offer - albeit without the stadium - has been accepted by the admins, and the EFL, and would allow the club to exit administration without incurring the -15(+) points deduction.

With this, you could reasonably say that the CK offer would be the baseline, the cheapest it gets. He's hardly going to pay more than is necessary.

We know that the price for the stadium, unless Mel moves, which seems very unlikely, is £22m.

Given what we know about how MA operates - swoop in at the last possible moment for the cheapest possible price - the thing that puzzles me the most, and thus worries me the most, with MAs 'offer', is he likely to match CK + £22m?

I would say not. So what will budge? 

We come out with paying the creditors the minimum amount, with another -15 next season, and assuming it’s going to take another couple of months to get everything signed, no players.

4 hours ago, Ram1988 said:

I think Stoke would be more keen to come to some sort of agreement than Leicester but it is just a pain for people to get to (if you live around Derby). No parking and as you say a trek to the station.

I thought Meadow Lane would make the most sense 19/20,000 which we could fill and it is easy to get to. You are right about it being complex though to avoid home fixtures with Notts County and Forest. 

All far from ideal...

 

Are people forgetting Port Vale?

12 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

Ashley would be my preference.

Ashley isn’t an option.