atherstoneram

Just now, SamUltraRam said:

True, but that ship has sailed.

My concern is that we're going to read other Ebosele type stories over the next week

That happens anyway whether a club is in administration or not.

14 minutes ago, SamUltraRam said:

So if this Ebosele story is true, it's exactly why Rooney said in early January that the ownership needed sorting before the end of the transfer window & he actually said that some of his players had been offered pre-contract deals elsewhere.

If the ownership was already sorted, we could have given these players new contracts which would also have protected their financial value to us

We could have offered these players new contracts, whether they accepted is another issue.

12 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

As others have said it's an absolutely shocking statement by the EFL. Tbh I'm at the point where I'm thinking mass protests at the EFL headquarters and pitch invasions in games as a response as there is clearly no integrity left in the league.

Pitch invasions will just push the EFL into making the club play their matches behind closed doors

12 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:

They probably don’t even need to reference the specific claims. They can get an injunction to stop the EFL kicking us out, or a clarification on how the insolvency act works to make it clear what they are allowed to do to any and all open claims.

EFL are the governing body, the club can't just get an injunction to stop the EFL kicking us out. They may be able to get an injunction once the EFL have announced we are being expelled from the league.

1 minute ago, Sparkle said:

He could always sell the ground to the council for £1 million and then the ground can either rent it out or sell it to a new buyer and that way at least the council would get some much needed money.

Aldi are always on the lookout for prime city center sites......

3 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Let's fold the club now and save ourselves pages and pages of debate then.

What's your plan to save the club that doesn't involve creditors not getting their full entitlement?

Has anyone actually said they should "take what they're given and be happy"? I doubt it.

Cut the hyperbole, we're just dealing with reality. There's no question unsecured creditors won't get much but, if DCFC are liquidated, they'll get nothing, and that seems an obtuse position to take by those who could stop it happening.

Quote

Some of the creditors may also be involved with other clubs which would send a clear message to them if we are liquidated.

12 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

I remember when rumours circulated that Mel was looking to put a roof on Pride Park and turn it into a performance venue.

Maybe that's still his intention, once the club goes to the wall.

An outdoor theatre with the First performance to be "How to not run a football club"

1 hour ago, Curtains said:

From the Independent Article 

“But it is understood they are concerned that, as far as they see it, no meaningful movement has occurred since and that Boro and Wycombe’s decision to pursue those actions is driving Derby towards liquidation.”

I don't in all honesty know how they can say that no meaningful movement has been made,how do they know,only as they see it and the administrators won't divulge that to them otherwise they would have to divulge the same information to all interested parties.Doing a Kirchner and blabbing off?

1 hour ago, Crewton said:

Because their cash position may well have deteriorated further since last September and even 25% could make a difference to them perhaps.

In no way am i arguing with you but they don't have to accept what is offered, we don't know the position of any creditors but i can't see them playing ball if someone tries to buy the club on the cheap.

1 minute ago, Crewton said:

Who's going to turn down something in favour of nothing though, when it comes to a straight vote of creditors? 

I acceot that it's a possibility but, if it does happen like that, and it's driven by the major creditors, I hope they take a moral lead and compensate unsecured creditors for the decision that they've taken, because some businesses will not have the financial strength to simply write-off the losses. It's not just their interest, or their desire to punish DCFC, that's at stake

 

The businesses that can't afford to write off the debt may have already ceased trading, not picking an argument but if the money wasn't there when it was due and possibly needed why would they worry about the club now.

6 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Really? To make it obvious for you.

The point was that the EFL apply the rules as they see fit, one interpretation does not fit all.

Reading are nowhere near the situation we are in.

1 minute ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It depends how ST and match day income comes into it. Obviously ST money is already in the bank and can count towards the total (about £2.8m for the remaining 9 games), but can match-by-match tickets be included? Probably not, but estimating 20k turn up for each game is a fair worst case scenario, so I personally believe that income should be in the proof of funding calculation.

 

There are different levels of embargo. It's reasonable to assume if *some* requirements are met, then we'll be allowed to sign some free agents.

Maybe the administrators have illustrated on a month by month basis that we will have funds to complete the season?

3 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I think the key one is that even under the embargo restrictions there was provision for *some* movement - the stance in January was an absolute "you're insolvent, we've got to see the money before you can sign any sort of contracts" which was frustrating, but, insolvent businesses generally get an awful lot of that.

With demonstrable funds for short term free agent contracts we should be able to bring in free agents on minimal wages. Obviously, at the EFL's discretion.

They may not allow us to increase the wage bill.

5 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Yes but as Reading know there's embargo and there's embargo!

But Reading aren't in administration and their owners don't seem to have a problem paying the bills or been asked for proof of funding to get through the season.

EFL tracker at present

Derby County

Regulation 16.2 - Failure to provide audited annual accounts

Regulation 16.3 - Annual Accounts not filed with Companies House

Regulation 17 - Default in payments to HMRC

Profit and Sustainability Rules - non-submission of audited accounts

Club in administration.

With the above i doubt the embargo can be lifted

1 minute ago, StaffsRam said:

They think Q have enough £££ to see out the season. They suggest that Q will push things towards liquidation to force creditors to accept something rather than nothing.

The creditors have probably already written the losses off so they could say pay us what we are owed or go away.

Just now, PistoldPete said:

If ashley is saying its a condition of  deal that they reduce their fees, what's the alternative? They charge full whack but no deal to save the club? Which means their reputation is absolute toast, they will never get a gig like this again. 

Why should they reduce their fees,if Ashley is that keen on buying the club he knows the conditions of sale

2 minutes ago, TheresOnlyWanChope said:

He’s the manager of the football team therefore he’s responsible for playing squad - any transfers affect that and should be communicated properly to him. 

I am sure if it was a player who affected the playing squad he would have been told beforehand.

Just now, TheresOnlyWanChope said:

Actually Rooney should be aware. He’s the manager of a football team. He won’t have a say necessarily but it should be good practice to tell him. Not everything will be confidential. Transfers etc should be communicated. They also have told Rooney they won’t be selling players and then have changed their mind. It’s not on to mislead people, especially the manager of a club fighting for survival. 

Just that,he is the manager of a football team,they are here to sort the finances out,have they changed their minds about selling players,they probably gave him that assurance for the transfer window?

19 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Ashley is reported to be wanting quantuma to cut their fees. If they are selling our best young talent over the head of the manager then that is exactly what quantuma should be doing foregoing their fee.

Really,why should they cut their fees,if they have to sell our best young talent it's for a reason,you,i or anyone else (including Rooney) are not at liberty to find out what is going on behind locked doors,they can't just do as they like,they have set practices to follow and if they don't then they get in serious trouble and can be struck off as insolvency practitioners.

5 minutes ago, Crewton said:

It appears that's what he was told, but Quantuma lied. 

Was that just for the transfer window?

17 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I’ve defended quantuma up to now even though they have consistently missed their Targets.

I am not defending this. It is unacceptable.

when is the next supporter group meeting? Time to challenge quantuma and the fees they are charging. 

 

 

What targets have they missed? They have never given a date for anything,it has always been we hope,we expect and it would be unwise for them to say anything other. Can't blame them for keeping quiet, they used the word imminently once,it didn't happen and they got vilified for it because it didn't happen.

8 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

I agree but their primary allegiance isnt to the fans of the club or the club itself that's the issue we've been landed with. 

Totally correct,as much as people go on they don't have to tell us anything,there is the matter of confidentiality for a start.

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

Where does it say that in the rules?

Look it up.

8 hours ago, StrawHillRam said:

I tend to agree with you. All the momentum from last couple of weeks send to be evaporating as each day passes.

Quantuma don’t care About Rooney, or the fans or the community. 
they’ll still be in business when we’re gone or in League 24.

They care about carrying out their legal responsibilities nothing more,nothing less, the same as any appointed administrators would.