Carl Sagan
-
Posts
9,399 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Carl Sagan
-
-
Here's a piece in the Financial Times from February about MSD Partners getting into football and loaning money to Derby. It says in the article they have zero interest in owning the club.
The FT sometimes has a paywall, but to read this I only had to answer one marketing question and it opened up:
https://www.ft.com/content/243f4030-aa2f-43c4-be32-723ba868d27a
-
The transcript of the interview, from Steve Nicholson of the DET, is at:
The audio of the interview, with Ed Dawes asking the questions, is 3 hours in at:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p09tqn5z
-
9 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:
Has it been suggested that Mel is stopping paying them?
Not as far as I know. Given the specific plaudits for them in the DCFC statement and the paying off of Barclays just before going into admin (making MSD the only party with a charge), I'm guessing Mel is in better contact with them than he is with Rooney.
- CBRammette and RoyMac5
-
1
-
1
-
36 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:
Hey B4. MSD stands for "Michael Saul Dell" and is the investment company owned by this American who founded and is Chairman of Dell Computers. Sometimes on the forum they're referred to as "Dell" instead of "MSD", as in the Dell v Mell thread.
We don't know what their intentions are. MSD has leant money to several football clubs at high interest rates because football tends to lose owners money and these owners find it difficult to borrow elsewhere to keep their clubs going. Given that, I think it highly unlikely MSD would want to step in and own the Rams (and start losing money instead). But we just don't know.
What we do know is that Derby's finances are highly complicated and MSD has a significant stake and role to play.
Quoting myself, it's more complicated in that Michael Dell's investment company is MSD Capital, which apparently manages about $10 billion of his $51 billion fortune. However, it is not MSD Capital but rather MSD Partners which has the charge on Pride Park and Moor Farm.
https://www.msdpartners.com/about-msd-partners#overview
My reading of this is that the folk running MSD Capital wanted their own stake in things so got together to create a second investment company of their own in 2009. Sometimes Michael Dell and his family invest through it.
-
1 minute ago, tomsdubs said:
Guess George is a liar then.
Unless, I suppose, the agent and George are only privy to the arrangements between clubs and the player (if WBA are paying and severance and whatever terms Derby are paying him) but the arrangements between the two clubs are kept confidential between them and don't involve the player. That could be an explanation? I don't know how this stuff works.
-
I wondered why we hadn't heard from @Derby bloodwho does wear his heart on his sleeve. Thanks for stepping in, Ruud.
It's a shame it's away as the administrators won't be getting any gate money in before the end of month payroll.
A week to nurse tired limbs is probably a good thing, and we should be pleased they play Southampton in the League Cup on Tuesday. If we can hold on to the defiant spirit Rooney has crafted, we should be competitive. Two questions regarding team selection:
- Whether to play Baldock, or Stretton, or a false number 9? Definitely option 2 or 3 for me.
- With Knight having another week, who misses out from Shinnie, Bird, Knight, Ravel, Sibley? One of them won't start.
My expectation is that Rooney will actually pick an unchanged starting 11, as a reward to the team against Stoke for delivering on the win in such difficult circumstances. And that would be understandable.
-
12 minutes ago, tomsdubs said:
He literally got lied to by the club and kept getting fit again but not played. Didn't find out until Rowett told him towards the end they would owe a fee so didn't play him. I don't blame him for being aggrieved to be honest.
If that was part of the transfer deal (and I think it emerged officially at some point), then surely Thorne would always have known about it from his agent, as well as from signing the contracts?
- Premier ram and Carnero
-
2
-
17 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:
Who is MSD guys not heard of them is there hope that some come in and take us over.
Hey B4. MSD stands for "Michael Saul Dell" and is the investment company owned by this American who founded and is Chairman of Dell Computers. Sometimes on the forum they're referred to as "Dell" instead of "MSD", as in the Dell v Mell thread.
We don't know what their intentions are. MSD has leant money to several football clubs at high interest rates because football tends to lose owners money and these owners find it difficult to borrow elsewhere to keep their clubs going. Given that, I think it highly unlikely MSD would want to step in and own the Rams (and start losing money instead). But we just don't know.
What we do know is that Derby's finances are highly complicated and MSD has a significant stake and role to play.
-
1 hour ago, sage said:
We have now got to hope that either a) a new buyer is found in the 2 weeks before we go into formal administration or at least b) a new buyer is in place before the January window, so it doesn't turn into a fire sale,
Also for (b), given administrators can't sell for the first 28 days anyway, they've effectively got to be able to find funds to pay at least two months worth of wages. And the wage bill is the biggest cost to the club by far. If incomings aren't sufficient and there's nothing for the administrators to liquidate, do players become free agents? And does the suspended 3 point penalty (for previously not paying wages on time) automatically get activated?
And does paying "football debts" in full mean we can no longer pay ongoing transfer fees (eg Bielik, Jozwiak) in instalments but have to pay the full whack?
I don't know the answer to any of these questions, but wonder if others might.
-
23 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:
We could have submitted the accounts and took the points charge that will still be due? Or will we be let off the P&S failures without Mel?!
I think the wording "resubmitting the accounts" has caused confusion. My understanding is it's not possible for us to resubmit any accounts to HMRC as they were fine and accepted by HMRC. And a company can't retrospectively go back and change them without very good reason (which the current situation doesn't count as). That's why we have "sent information" (as Nixon put it) to the EFL to say "this is what the accounts would have said, had we amortized the way you now say you want". And the EFL can sit on that forever. And Derby's case would have been "we can't submit the latest accounts to the HMRC until we know that you're satisfied with what we've sent you" with the additional caveat that Mel mentioned in his interview that suggests EFL want to punish us several times for the same offence. Meaning they could pile on points deductions year on year when the offences wouldn't have happened had the league not accepted the accounts in the first place.
I'm not sure that answers the question, but I didn't really understand the question! :D
-
3 minutes ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:
Where's that information from?
I simply quoted a fellow poster who's been one of the most reliable sources of insider info on the club on here and also on other forums in the past. No idea who @Super Derby Super Rams's sources are and I'm sure he wouldn't reveal them!
-
13 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:
Seems like the accounts are all good to go but we're waiting on answers from the EFL still, but the EFL have seen the draft copies
I wonder if the final trigger for admin wasn't the EFL's threat on Tuesday to simply keep us under embargo in perpetuity, meaning Mel would never be able to sell the club. That was what I read into the end of their statement and I suspect Mel did too.
"There are no timescales for this matter to be concluded and the League will not be providing any further comment at this time."
https://www.efl.com/news/2021/september/efl-statement-Derby-county/
-
-
12 hours ago, San Fran Van Rams said:
The timing is so odd in satisfying the Barclays charge. Only reason i can think of is that it makes it easier for MSD to take control of the stadium and Moor Farm. Perhaps it was more palatable for Mel to transfer these assets to MSD this way as opposed to selling it to them out right. Doesn't make a lot of sense in my mind unless MSD expect to buy the club. Even then, I keep coming back to the question as to why MSD didn't just buy the club from Mel as opposed to letting it get into this mess. Assume it's cheaper for them to do it this way and they've just had Mel's pants down.
You mention their additional financing. Did MSD provide additional funding recently?
The official Derby statement on Friday night says MSD have put in additional recent funding:
"We are especially grateful to MSD Partners, who have been hugely supportive and have provided additional financial assistance this year, going far beyond the original loan it provided in August 2020."
-
Mel effectively says there was a trigger (something to do with him wanting to sell but covering the losses until that happened?) which meant parties interested in buying the club were always going to be happy to wait for admin before moving as it was going to be in their interest to take the club on debt free. Which is why he claims this is in the best interests of the club now, as it will move that process along.
He says he's lost £200 million. I think he said that, just over the weekend, fifteen potential buyers expressed an interest.
-
4 hours ago, NottsRam77 said:
I havent seen this statement praising dell … would be interested to read it or see a snippet
It was in the Club Official Statement on Friday night:
"We are especially grateful to MSD Partners, who have been hugely supportive and have provided additional financial assistance this year, going far beyond the original loan it provided in August 2020."
-
13 minutes ago, MuespachRam said:
Just watching the splashdown….what an incredible feat….they are all amazing and you thought those Supers were Inspirational today…. This is truly inspirational, what a great day.
Fantastic wasn't it? Everything flawless and only 40 minutes between splashdown and disembarking. I'm sure I've been held on the tarmac at an airport for longer.
Amazing for a civilian crew to spend 3 days in space on their own, and go so very far from Earth, and under such control. It gives me confidence that the week-long "dearMoon" mission for artists to go around the Moon and back isn't as far-fetched as first appeared. But that's in the mighty Starship which most of this thread is about, rather than the tiny Crew Dragon.
-
Here is the Companies House information about "charges" on the club:
MSD hold the only two charges (first two on the list), one for Pride Park and one for Moor Farm. As @Charlotte Rampoints out in the Mel vs Dell thread, the other charge was held by Barclays Bank and paid in full on 14th September. If you follow the link this is the fourth item.
I think this means what happens to the stadium and training ground is now up to MSD. But, given the DCFC Official Statement went out of its way to mention how helpful MSD had been, we can also surmise MSD have a plan, and perhaps their additional financing was to pay off Barclays just before going into admin.
It was odd that none of this seemed to be mentioned by Maguire on the Radio Derby phone in, but what he did get right was that if (and when?) administration is entered into, no one can buy the club for 28 days as one of the functions of administration is to protect the club from that happening too quickly.
-
This is something I tried to ask about in the Pride Park/Moor Farm thread. Were the "charges" on the club's assets or on Mel's separate assets? What is actually owned by DCFC, what by Mel, and what by Dell? If DCFC call in administrators but Mel owns the stadium and training facility, what is Derby County's except the staff?
The wording about "intention" to go into admin is interesting. The wording being careful to praise Dell is interesting. We know the ownership and financial structure of DCFC is exceedingly complex (to put it mildly). There are probably a lot of twists and turns yet in this saga, before things become properly clear. If they ever do...
-
1 hour ago, CornwallRam said:
No idea what is going to happen. Just want to add a little clarification. Moor Farm's buildings are owned by Mel with a charge from MSD. The land is leased from Loco Park Estate. I believe that the lease also has a charge on it.
So could that mean neither the stadium nor the training complex are part of admin? And if Mel continues to pay the interest or repays the loans, he simply owns them outright again? But if he doesn't, then MSD inherit it all to do with as they see fit?
-
1 hour ago, CBRammette said:
Is this ahead if your purchase?
Just doing my due diligence. Sadly more thorough than Mel's...
- Ramos and CBRammette
-
2
-
I've started this thread as I don't know what the position is but others on here hopefully do.
My understanding is that, separate from the club, Mel Morris owns Pride Park Stadium.
However, something called a "charge" is on both the stadium and separately on Moor Farm, to MSD which is the investment arm of Michael Dell (originally the Dell Computers founder) which loans money to desperate UK football clubs at very high interest rates. I believe MSD gave us 2 loans to keep the club functioning.
What does all this mean for the future? I don't know what a charge is or what the implications are.
Might it be that Derby end up like Coventry were until recently, playing miles out of our home town and not in the stadium purpose-built for us? Will Mel rent the ground to the club at a nominal rate? Will he rent it to us at a commercial rate? Will he sell it back to new owners? Or is it not up to him, but rather up to MSD? Do the administrators have any say in any of this? What is likely the position for the remainder of the season?
For Moor Farm, again, does MSD have any claim or say on what happens? Will the administrators likely try to sell the site?
Any informed opinions or guesswork welcome. I imagine this could be a key element of entering administration, but don't know what the implications are likely to be.
-
5 minutes ago, BathRam72 said:
Listening to Curtis Davis post match. What a leader that man is.
We've only conceded 7 goals this season. Bournemouth and Coventry have the best defensive record, having conceded 6. Given the circumstances and the impossible start to the season, that is astonishing. Yes you defend as a team, but Curtis is the beating heart of that defence.
-
Just now, cosmic said:
There’s your yellow!
It was the one before (Ostigard on 77 minutes)!
Derby to win, both teams to score, 2+ bookings each team, 4+ corners each team, 50/1!
Confess I took the cash out and settled for £550 on 80 minutes. Wonderful we won and I'll forego the extra £200 for that. Watched us throw away a lead too many times. Brilliant win and I'm very happy. And contacting the administrators first thing Monday morning!
- RoyMac5, AbuDerbyDave, Steve How Hard? and 13 others
-
6
-
7
-
2
-
1
Dell v Mel
in Derby County Forum
Posted
The piece says that traditional lenders won't touch football clubs because they don't want the situation of defaults and inheriting football stadia etc. Presumably MSD entered the market knowing the risk but accepting it because of the incredibly high rewards. But they must have a plan in place for when it happens. Perhaps they will take the club out of administration without the debts, and then sell it on to a third party, having made it more attractive. And then offer that new owner a high-interest loan facility when required.