G STAR RAM
-
Posts
21,757 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by G STAR RAM
-
-
1 minute ago, Tyler Durden said:
What evidence do you have that's the case.
Evidence of what?
-
1 minute ago, CBRammette said:
Ah so everyone not able to come is a moaner?
No not at all. Just saying I'm not missing the moans and groans.
Will be interesting to see how many of those unable to come all of a sudden become able to come again next week though.
-
2 minutes ago, 24Charlie said:
It’s down to the farcical season ticket system and off field shananigans.
Everyone else got them sold before the start of the season.
Myself, as a multi year season ticket holder, have only been to the Salford game. I didn’t go to Huddersfield or Boro. I have bitten the bullet and forked out for Forest though it does wind me up that a league match is not included.
After that it’s Stoke and onward we go.
I imagine a few are like me but I doubt it will account for the 10k that are missing.
I think the off field actions have done for most of those missing. My feeling is we’ll be up to 20k by Stoke and I suppose it depends how we get on after that.
What is farcical about it?
If it is so farcical that you decided not to go to the first 2 games, what has changed that made you buy a ticket for the Forest game?
-
40 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:
The referee and the idiot running the East Stand line were embarassing. There was one incident in the second half when I think it was Forsyth winning the ball with a good tackle, the Boro muppet went down - ref hesitated for a few seconds, looked to the lino for guidance, the lino was struck dumb, looked at the ref for guidance and the ref must have thought to himself 'I'd better make some sort of decision here' and awarded a foul against Fozzy.
Crazy where they get these idiots from.
The worst thing is that it was actually a foul on Fozzy, he caught there guy flat footed and nipped i to take the ball off him, their player stuck a leg out and tripped Fozzy.
Ref blew up, realised he had no idea why he had blown so asked the linesman what had happened.
Don't usually slate refs but he was poor and was conned time after time today, by players from both teams.
The foul given against Byrne when their guy tried the silly salmon was ridiculously embarrassing.
-
I'm not missing them. Its fine to be down to the number that we are who are fully behind the team.
I'm sure the missing fans will miraculously return next week and so will the moans and groans when we dont score in the first 10 minutes.
- secretsquirrel, Ellafella, Premier ram and 20 others
-
11
-
6
-
2
-
4
-
3 hours ago, GboroRam said:
That was likely politically motivated
Are The WHO politically affiliated?
-
15 minutes ago, Eddie said:
Back home now following a few days in Kings Lynn.
Heading down to Hove towards the end of September for the Sussex v Derbyshire match - may squeeze a Blackpool long weekend in beforehand, and probably another one afterwards. Then, hopefully, the Bruges beer festival next February.
Ah, retirement.
Despite how miserable you are in the other thread, its good to see you are actually getting on with life and enjoying your retirement!
We have a few sites not too far from Kings Lynn and its turning out to be a bumper season so far, was Kings Lynn busy?
-
8 minutes ago, Anon said:
Was the science nonsense or gospel when the experts initially told everyone that masks were pointless?
Was the science nonsense or gospel when the experts decreed it was racist to limit travel from China and international borders should remain open?
It's difficult to tell the difference between experts and conspiracy theorists nowadays, especially when one can easily morph into the other.
Dont forget the social distancing advice...2 metres away, no 1 way metre away, no don't be close to someone for more than 15 minutes!
-
12 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:
No you're dangerously spouting guesswork. You haven't any educated basis for what you're saying and you're putting other people's lives at risk with your anti-vaccine nonsense.
How is the poster putting lives at danger out of interest?
I've also not seen any anti-vaccine nonesense from him, he has said he is double jabbed which would seem to indicate, to me anyway, that he is not anti vaccine.
The poster actually raised a valid point. @JoetheRamclaimed it was the vaccine stopped him from catching Covid from his partner, and although that may have been the case, there is no way of knowing if it did, the poster then gave an example which proved its not always the vaccine that stops you from catching it from your partner.
Seems you are just attacking the poster rather than any point they have made on the basis they are not a scientific expert?
You may not have noticed but despite the number of scientific experts across the world, the number of deaths from this pandemic is in the millions, so they obviously don't always get everything right...
-
14 minutes ago, Wolfie said:
Yes.
If you did some research, and by that I mean actual research of the science behind immunity, you would know that it wanes after a few months/years. That's why boosters for any vaccination exist. Some required more frequently than others.
Vaccine induced immunity to Covid wanes after a few months and natural immunity (from an infection) even quicker, so yes, boosters are required regularly - especially when new variants appear.
But then that's the "official line" again that you automatically dismiss, so I realise I've just wasted my time again.
Laughing response in 5,4,3......
Where has the data arrived from for the boosters to be required already?
To be fair the idea of boosters being required was talked about very early in the vaccination programme.
-
41 minutes ago, Wolfie said:
I think you'll find the sensible people realise that the real conroversy would happen if we were still locked down & still doing first jabs because we'd shipped them all to poorer countries, rather than reach for the nearest conpiracy.
Imagine the backlash if the government (of any country and colour) chose to proritise helping poor nations above fully protecting their own. Isn't that the number 1 priority of any government?.
I don't know how many jabs we have shared around the world, so can't really have an opinion on whether it's enough or not.
I dont think anyone would argue with this point but arent they already talking about booster jabs starting as early as next month?
'Nobody is safe until the whole world is safe' was the mantra remember.
-
-
Just looking at the Government coronavirus dashboard, I'm sure that the percentage of adults vaccinated has actually gone down over the last few days, anyone else noticed this?
-
8 hours ago, rammieib said:
I thought the money for the stadium had been exchanged already, thus Gellaw XXX who own the stadium do not owe the club anything?
It may well have done but it certainly had not as at 30 June 2018 and obviously with no accounts released since we don't have any evidence.
I thought in the report released by the IDC it had mentioned the ground being paid for in 8 instalments of £10m but I may have dreamt that up!
-
17 minutes ago, Rev said:
As I understood it, a person without a controlling interest in the club can write off loans, and that would class as income for P&S purposes. Which isn't possible for an owner under the current rules.
It seemed to suggest this would be better done over a period of time, I guess in order to spread the benefit over more than one 3 year period.
The above terminology may not be correct, but that was the gist.
But doesnt explain how we have gone from having a debtor of £80m to a supposed creditor of £140m?
-
3 minutes ago, Charlotte Ram said:
The debt written off will in my understanding be counted as income and would therefore be taxable, the debt write off by the creditors would count as losses on their P&L and therefore could be offset against tax, this is my understanding but as ever I could always be wrong but the scenario makes sense
But the debt is in another company.
Also the debts are nothing to do with trade so doubt this has any tax consequences.
-
54 minutes ago, Carnero said:
The loans sit in the parent company. The club itself was debt-free as at 30 June 2018 as you have correctly pointed out many times before.
Didn't see the Al Jazeera thing but don't see how MM writing the loans off has any P&S benefit for the club.
-
3 hours ago, Crewton said:
In the scam documentary, he told the fake reporters that he had £140M of outstanding loans, but they wouldn't have to pay those back, they could write them off gradually over a number of seasons which would "be beneficial in terms of FFP". What he'd get back would therefore depend on what they paid for the purchase of the club etc.
3 hours ago, OohMartWright said:If Mel allowed the club to write off loans due to him (the correct term is "debt forgiveness"), this would constitute income in the hands of the club at the point at which each amount was waived. If these amounts were done piecemeal over several seasons then the appropriate proportion would be reflected in each season's accounts. I'm not sure whether the FFP rules have any special provisions about this, but given that it is most definitely "income" it should indeed be beneficial.
3 hours ago, rammieib said:I wonder if he is theoretically including the stadium in there?
At 30 June 2018, MM (or another of his companies) OWED the cub circa £80m.
For us to now be in a position of owing £140m to MM would mean he would have injected £220m into the club in the last 3 years. Absolutely no chance.
-
1 hour ago, Spanish said:
the context is someone has personal reasons to limit the risk of infection not that he has been scared by press articles. But you know that.
Having already caught it once and having been double jabbed, I'd imagine there is very little reason to be scared of it.
1 hour ago, Eddie said:Is it irrational to be wary of something that has a (non-vaccinated) death rate around 2%?
If you're vaccinated against it, yes.
-
1 hour ago, Spanish said:
The guy has had actual experience rather than led by propaganda, why is there a need to spin every story to meet an agenda
Is it really an agenda?
It has been admitted that the Government tried to scare the population into compliance, its bound to have left many with an irrational fear of the virus.
-
7 minutes ago, GboroRam said:
Are you suggesting that whoever in the Punjabi Rams that reported the comment doesn't understand what racism is?
I'm not suggesting anything about them as I don't know any of them personally or who reported the incident.
Obviously if you do then you are in a better position than me for judgjng that.
-
10 minutes ago, GboroRam said:
I'll trust that the Punjabi Rams know what counts as racist.
Wow. Wouldn't be surprised if this comment was on a par with whatever was said to Jozwiak.
- Philmycock and Mihangel
-
2
-
19 minutes ago, angieram said:
Okay, I have just been right through the Jacob Butterfield transfer thread. 59 pages. One poster @Carl Sagan called it out as a bad signing. Just one.
Two or three more thought the price was high but that he was a good player.
Rest were all saying he is class, we could sign who we wanted, we have the money, Rush/Morris are gods, that sort of stuff.
Someone said we should be signing better as Butterfield might not cut it in the Premier League when we got promoted at the end of the season!
Many fans on the forum may have been changing their minds a few games into his Derby career, but it's just not true that they were doing it as he was signed.
Well done @angieram, I started to do it last night and was going to copy the quotes but then I realised I couldn't be bothered!
Like I said, its a complete re-writing of history and its amazing how many people try it!
Its pretty much the same with the Bradley Johnson signing, from memory there was only @Bris Vegaswho thought it was a bad signing but within a year or two there were lots of people claiming to have called it out as a bad signing at the time.
I'll admit I thought Butterfield would be a good signing based on what I had been told about him at Barnsley and how he had performed for Huddersfield. I also Johnson would be a goal scoring midfielder for us, as he had been in Norwich promotion season, but he never really seemed to be played as such.
-
41 minutes ago, 1967RAMS said:
Assets. Players who I doubt we will get more than say 10 million for
Liabilities HMRC debt, contracts to players and the massive amount of monies put in by MM which will sit as loans owed to him and the various companies controlled by him
These cannot just be written off, nor can a company “give” a stadium away that they paid 80 million for without serious HMRC investigation into possible fraudulent business transactions. Never said I have an answer as I doubt there is one, the only legal way to write down the debt is administration in my very limited knowledge of it . Happy for you to correct me on this if you have any better ideas
Value of players is subjective but agree that we don't have much value on that front. Personally think we would be closer to £20m.
The HMRC debt, well we know there is one as it is listed as a reason for the EFL embargo, rumoured to be £20m but there is no information available in the public domain to back this up.
Contracts to players, yes they are a liability but also you need these contracts to be able to generate income.
As I have said on numerous occasions, as at 30 June 2018 (the latest accounts filed at Companies House) there is no debt to MM or any of his companies. The money has been put into the club via equity not debt.
MM may have monies owed from his other companies but that is not a debt of the club.
Not really sure what your point about giving the ground away is and to be honest it makes no sense.
If MM has a ground worth £80m and debts secured against it of £80m, the purchaser would pay £0 but it doesnt mean that the ground is being given away. No idea how you have concluded that HMRC would see that as fraudulent.
As far as I can see, the only debt we would eliminate by administration is the HMRC debt. Everything else appears to be secured against assets, so MM has nothing to gain by doing it and an awful lot to lose. He would lose the ground and see his club relegated to League One, would that make us an attractive proposition to any potential buyer?
Missing Supporters
in Derby County Forum
Posted
The fact that its pretty much the same every time we play Forest