CornwallRam

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?

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?

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?

I quite like the idea that we run ourselves much more sustainably and that would imply more financial backing isn't a pre-requisite. 
However, I see a big disconnect between what many posters here are expecting in terms of incoming and what a modest rescue package and EFL business plan will allow.
I am thinking of a Bolton scenario, where we have a small young squad and a loyal band of followers who get that it is all going to take time.
I could live with that, I am unsure how many more could. 10,000? 
I am not sure how reflective of the active supporter base this forum actually is as all my match-going mates will 100% be there whatever the circumstances. I don't know any floating supporters so don't really know how they are thinking.

Reckon he misheard - thought the new owner was asking if he'd be toupeed and threw his toys out the pram.... ?

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.
 

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.
 

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.

Stuck in the middle with Roo.

Gabay, Sheikh Khaled, Alonso and Kirchner?

It just feels like a massive cloud has lifted. A proper bidder with actual money willing to save our club.
David Clowes is my new hero?
COYR

It just feels like a massive cloud has lifted. A proper bidder with actual money willing to save our club.
David Clowes is my new hero?
COYR

It just feels like a massive cloud has lifted. A proper bidder with actual money willing to save our club.
David Clowes is my new hero?
COYR

It just feels like a massive cloud has lifted. A proper bidder with actual money willing to save our club.
David Clowes is my new hero?
COYR

It just feels like a massive cloud has lifted. A proper bidder with actual money willing to save our club.
David Clowes is my new hero?
COYR

I always thought it was pronounced "messiah"

not sure how you come to that conclusion Rynny!
The start of our problem(s) was MM sacking SMc, this was followed by MM sanctioning PClement signings, this was followed up by MM sacking PClement, this was followed by MM sanctioning NPearson signings, this was followed by MM sacking NPearson and so on... you catch my drift.
I firmly believe that under Sam Rush's stewardship, the signings were more shrewd, the football better and the hiring and firing more sensible.
When MM took the power from Sam Rush, that's when it fell apart.

Hold on, is this..... it is... a post on actual football....
 
I don't know how to deal with this. Can you edit and add SOMETHING about finance?

No, no, no - that's not how it's done. Please send those funds to the USA and then back to a European Clearing Bank, then on to lawyer's client account, then they'll be ready.
Have these people never seen Ozarks?
Bloody basics!

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. 

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.

That's exactly why we need an independent regulator in football. 

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.