CornwallRam
-
Posts
4,705 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by CornwallRam
-
-
What a brilliant thread.
The reality is that bringing in so many players is likely to be problematical. A couple just won't fit in and a couple will miss significant time due to injuries. The rest will take time to gel and it will take Liam a while to learn about his players.
I reckon that looks like a mid-table squad. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that everything could click and we make the top 6.
That is a far better position than I expected and about a million times better than I feared. We're a proper club again.
I know I've said it before, but thank you David Clowes. I think every Derby fan owes you a pint.
- derby8, GlastoEls, Premier ram and 1 other
-
4
-
It's just occurred to me that it would be brilliant to have something like a hundred statues of our most historic figures around Pride Park...I'm thinking of a Ram's version of Gormley's Another Place.
We should have William Morley and our 'saviours' Webb, Gadsby and Clowes. Obviously we'd have maybe our 50 greatest players and many of our managers, but then it could be fun to have some villains. Keogh, Bennett and Lawrence for Joiner's gate. Mel for being a worse owner than actual criminals. Sam Longson for accepting that resignation. Paul Jewell for for his home movie and that season. Kenny Burns for being the most irritating of ex-players.
It would be a fantastic way to celebrate the club's re-birth and an acknowledgement that supporting Derby is a bit different, but never, ever boring.
I can just imagine taking kids to the ground and being asked who that statue is? It would actually be a great way to connect through the generations.
COYR
-
Just fantastic...I'm actually tearful. ?
-
-
1 hour ago, Animal is a Ram said:
There's a fine gym at the Arena... might just be faster to buy that at the minute.
Build new training pitches on the nature reserve behind the ground and turn Moor Farm into a nature reserve.
- jimtastic56 and Animal is a Ram
-
1
-
1
-
45 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:
Do you not think that was down to Pearce, he knows where 'the bodies are buried'.
No, I think Pearce was an employee trying his best to make his boss's hare-brained schemes work.
After all, Mel was happy to interfere in footballing decisions, when he had no experience. He's a successful businessman, so it's beyond comprehension that he wouldn't be the driving force in business decisions.
-
4 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:
There seems to be a widespread inability to separate poor communication from overall competence. That combined with a misappropriation of blame whenever things don't go to plan is a lethal combination.
We didn't enter administration for a laugh. In the financial position Mel Morris left us, even before considering the extra problems he created with the EFL and Steve Gibson etc, liquidation was a very real possibility and perhaps even the most likely outcome. People appear to have forgotten just how much of a poo-show was inherited
Very few people would have touched the job. Part of a (particularly unbalanced) Athletic article the other week included one would-be practitioner saying they wouldn't have taken the job on unless the stadium was included in the first place, but they also recognised that there was no way of forcing that to happen. It struck me as a bit odd to say the least - it's too hard a job for them to take on, but they'll criticise those who did when it proves difficult? Nice one, Gerald.
The only thing that matters is that there is a buyer, anything more than that - avoiding further points penalties from not paying 25% and not paying player wages - is a bonus. That we are currently in a position of completing a deal that provides those bonuses is evidence in itself that the claims of gross incompetence are pretty far fetched.
Yes, some things could have been handled better, that will always be the case in a complex deal like this. Imperfection isn't incompetence. Incompetence would have seen us fold months ago, or starting next season with a points deduction that far exceeds even last season's.
Complain all you like about deadlines etc, but quite frankly I couldn't give a toss if their communication skills upset people just as long as in the end the job gets done in the end!
Indeed - it's hard to defend Quantuma's 'deadline' communication, but I suspect that they deserve a huge amount of credit for untangling the rats nest left by Mel Morris. Assuming this final hurdle gets cleared they have had a big hand in rescuing our club.
-
1 hour ago, Elwood P Dowd said:
I assume Q took the payment in good faith accepting it as CKs commitment to fund the club from May. Its my opinion, based on the few bits of information we have, that if Stretford\SSS lent CK the money to fulfil CKs commitment to fund the club from May then the only course of action for Stretford\SSS is to ask CK to repay the loan.
Do they make wheel clamps big enough for private jets?
-
I wonder what's going to happen with Stretford's cash?
It's quite possible that someone, eg, Rooney, gave him the cash to pay, but the question is the same, it's just the donor's name which changes.
Will it be another debt that the new owner has to pay? Will it just be written off? Will Stretford try to get it back from Kirchner? Will Kirchner then try get it back from Clowes?
Nothing is ever simple at DCFC.
-
I'm going to assume the best and hope to see Clowes complete the takeover today or tomorrow.
If that proves to be correct, it's amazing how uncomplicated it suddenly seems to have become. As soon as someone appears with the will and the finances, the deal breezes through. No bank holiday issues, no complaints in the press about being ignored by Quantuma, nothing held up by anti-money laundering checks etc
It's almost like the others were cheapskates or fantasists.
-
We need to adopt this as our new anthem. Perfect tribute to our new owner.
-
36 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:
But we’re never going to pay the creditors in full. So, are the extra restrictions only for a set period of time (sorry, I’m sure the answer is somewhere easy to find myself but I’m too lazy/cold here on holiday ?).
My understanding is that we get two years of restrictions as part of the adminstration process. This is extended by a year if we go for the 35% over 3 years option.
The reasons are supposedly two fold:
Firstly, to enshrine sustainability into the club restructure. If, for example, we're limited to a 25 man squad with a maximum wage bill of £75k per week, we ought to be able to run at a profit. It will effect income, but we'll be expected to trim unnecessary expenditure to accommodate. Two years down the line and we should look like a stable club, ready for investment to take us forward.
Secondly, it's part of the punishment. It's part of the reaction to Leicester's actions when they wiped most of their debts and new owners came in and 'bought' the league. The restrictions are there to stop 'big' clubs from wiping debts and then outspending everyone else.
As @angieramalluded to in an earlier post, in terms of spending, we are going to be a small League 1 club for the next two to three years. Maybe a genius of a manager could squeeze us into the play offs, but it's staggeringly unlikely.
We need to reign in our expectations and and celebrate still having a club to support.
I wonder if it's possible to patent a Mel Morris dartboard?
-
On the plus side, Clowes looks to be over 40 and is clearly both a fan and a man who feels obligated to do the right thing.
So come on David, your first decision should be the obvious one to finally turn the club's luck around.
Bring back the proper colours. I know I speak for all fans - well the sensible ones at least...Derby County should play in white shirts and navy blue shorts.
-
Lots of good shouts, but I wonder how many would be interested, especially if we start on -15?
Dyche would be the best possible appointment, but I think is an unrealistic option.
Warnock, Clough, Hughton, Eustace, Mowbray, Carsley or Warburton would all be excellent appointments for a League 1 club with no players and ongoing restrictions.
In reality, it'll be Rosenior.
Personally, I'd go for Paul Simpson though.
-
2 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:
He hadn't been released from his contract yet though you're totally overlooking.
If we force him to honour it or pay it off then we'll get a nice amount back from him if you believe the reports of him being on 90k a week.
The admins must know this too. So we can still insist that he stays or he has to pay his way out.
Or maybe he's just refused to be Tuped?
-
-
-
1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:
No it is not.
Stokes owners have put their money in as loans.
The money put into DCFC was as equity.
Please show me where on the administrators report, there is an unsecured creditor in DCFC for £123m.
You are completely missing the point that it is not just the club in adminstration. It is the group of companies which I listed earlier that are in joint administration. Consequently, their liabilities have to be considered jointly.
You are completely mistaken in your premise.
If you take some time to actually read the administrators statement at Companies House, you might begin to understand your mistake. You cannot separate out one company from the rest in a joint administration.
-
1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:
There is no directors loan in The Derby County Football Club Limited, that's not my opinion, thats a fact in black and white in the public domain.
MM is owed money from Gellaw but that is not the responsibility of the football club.
It is because the companies are linked in a joint administration. The DCFC Ltd, Club DCFC, Stadia DCFC, Gellaw 203 and Sevco 5112 are all in joint administration. If you look at the administrators' statement, their figures are combined as a grand total.
I imagine that Gellaw and Sevco will be liquidated and neither have significant creditor claims, meaning that Mel hasn't tried to enforce the loans as debts - but that doesn't mean he could not have done. I assume he knows that if he did, it would just guarantee liquidation and he'd have no chance of recouping any of his money from the stadium.
-
3 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:
No we didn't owe £193m on entering administration.
There is not £123m that MM could have claimed from the club.
You cannot buy shares in a company and then claim the money back if things go tits up.
But that is exactly what the figure that you have quoted for Stoke includes.
I'd also say that your premise that we didn't owe that figure is a little shaky as it's listed as an unsecured debt in the administrators' report.
Just because it was 'borrowed' from one of Mel's other companies, does not mean it didn't exist or was unrecoverable. It was not equity or a director's loan. It's possible that it became unrecoverable as soon as Gellaw went into administration though, so Mel had no choice but to write it off.
-
12 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:
But we dont owe £123.4m to MM so its irrelevant.
MM has pulled the plug and our club owes somewhere in the region of £70m.
If the clubs listed above had their owners pull the plug that is what they would owe.
Just correcting the poster that was saying our debts are the highest ever seen in the Championship, they are not even close.
But that's illogical.
At the point of entering administration, we owed c£193m. That is the direct comparison with the above list.
OK, it seems from the administrators update that Mel hasn't claimed the £123.4m, but that doesn't mean it didn't exist, nor that the owners of the other clubs wouldn't do something similar if they went into admin.
To compare our £70m with Stoke's £230m is comparing apples to oranges - they are two different things.
-
7 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:
Stoke debts at 31 May 2021 £230m
Middlesbrough debts at 30 June 2021 £150m
Birmingham debts at 30 June 2021 £117m
Reading debts at 30 June 2021 £116m
Nottingham Forest debts at 30 June 2021 £73m
By G Star Ram
The Stoke debts include loans by the owner - I suspect that others do too. If our £123.4m owed to Mel is included, we were getting up towards £200m in debt.
- jimtastic56, Miggins and Crewton
-
1
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Mckram said:
Even more reason to keep it then.
Now you mention it, it’s something like wage bill being a % of turnover isn’t it?
http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php#:~:text=Clubs in the League 1,%2C the limit is 55%.
Clubs in the League 1 and League 2 operate within a Spending Constraint framework termed Salary Cost Management Protocol (SMCP). SCMP limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages
-
1 hour ago, Mckram said:
I think that’s the one thing we still have going for us, so I’d be gutted if we did that.
Also in terms of P&S rules I’m sure the academy doesn’t count towards it, so if we got say Mike Ashley as owner and he was happy to fund the academy then I hope he does. Only got to look at the players who have come through in the last few years and the transfer fees we should have had from them.
No P&S in League 1
Recruitment, make do and mend!
in Derby County Forum
Posted
Oh I don't know.
A couple of times I have gotten so carried away on Championship Manager that I've lost track of time. I've never quite played it for 24 hours, but once it could have been 18. Just imagine if you were doing it for real and getting paid for it; I could easily see it getting a bit obsessive.