Kathcairns

Just booked my hire car in advance of the Middlesbrough away trip…??

I won’t ever give money for Tickets to this Gibson fella - Middlesbrough away is never going to happen for me anymore 

So if the £15m owed to MSD is against the stadium, and the stadium is owned by Mel. Doesn't that mean the £15m is owed by Mel? 

Maybe they need to compromise or they will look as though they just don’t care about the club or the Derby area 

This is so right. Unlike other businesses, our only assets are players. A 'normal' liquidated business would sell off material assets to pay off HMRC.
But if we are liquidated players become free agents. No opportunity to pay anyone anything.
The only option is to come to an agreement.
It potentially becomes a game of chicken. How hard would the creditors (mainly HMRC) push things, knowing if they push too hard they get nothing. 

I totally agree that’s why with the new HMRC rules we are in a mess if they want all the money. 

The only saving grace is if we go into liquidation the HMRC get 100 percent of nothing .
The meeting between administrators and HMRC will be difficult as outcome could have effect on the local economy if we are in liquidation and HMRC get nothing 
 
 

I think if he wanted to pay some of the debt towards the HMRC he would have done so before we ever got to this stage.When someone says he is only prepared to put enough money into the club to keep it ticking over you would have thought that would include paying bills as well.

I guess MMs counter argument would be, would you still be paying your electricity bill on time if you lost your job and had no income?
I think the most annoying thing about this is that MM has said this is all purely down to Covid which lost us £20m income. Well if that's true why is he supposedly leaving us with £60m of debt and not £20m?

Exactly, nobody should be paying the debt other than the person/people who got us in a position of running up such a debt.

Because HMRC did not chase up any debts during Covid and MM obviously saw this as a good opportunity to run up debt that he would not be liable for.
He used HMRC as a cheap source of financing and left DCFC to pick up the tab.
Forget anything else he did that was good for the club and his sob story about writing out cheques every month, basically he thinks it is righg for the taxpayer to bear the cost of his mistakes.
 

"Carl Jackson, from Derby's administrators Quantuma, said on Tuesday: “We’ve had some very positive discussions with Arsenal and they’ve allowed us to defer those payments until a later date.
“That has freed up some cash for us and that’s been agreed in writing. 
“It will certainly help our cash-flow over the course of the next two to three months and also sorts out any threatened embargo from the EFL at the same time.”

Max is good. But not that good

Why don't you think they're just being nice? 1.4m isn't going to be a big deal to them right now. When they wanted the last instalment (which I think was one that put us further into embargo again) we weren't in administration and they probably thought we should pay up like any other club. Now they can see the former owner has got the club into a mess and they are doing their bit to help where possible. Unlike Steve Gibson who would like to see the club disappear all together by the look of things.

We have sold Hughes , hendrick, bogle and Lowe plus got a bit of compo for Delap and Gordon . That easily has covered £2.5 m for   Last few seasons , plus we have several others who would fetch a few million more . 
 
£300 k to keep it going for another three months is neither here nor there. 

The fact we do not own the ground is not such a huge deal lots of clubs do not own their grounds look down the A52 for one.
Many of the Spanish and Italian clubs do not own theirs and in America too. It is only major issue to supporters and potential investors from overseas will not see it has a deal breaker. 
 
 
 

The Daily Fail article is up to their usual standard. Mixing up “:secured creditors” with “ preferred creditors” , mixing up market value with asset values, referring to an HMRC bail out (nobody is expecting HMRC ago pay any money into the club) . oh and then there are all those anonymous sources. 
 
If Sunderland were sold for £30 million that will reflect the club’s assets and their debts. Of course Derby’s market value is likely to be less than that, that is why they are in administration. Insolvency means the market value would be nothing .
 
but comparing market value with debts is just very misleading. 

And we drew both games against boro so no obvious advantage gained . In any case even if boro had finished on the play offs what would that have brought them . 
 
thr proper test anyway is what if Derby hadn’t broken the rules  ( as alleged) . They allegedly overspent by £4million up to 2017/18.. what advantage did that give them in 2018/19? Marginal at best .. in fact if we hadn’t wasted money we would have been in a better place now.
 
boro’s case would be stronger against the Efl who had they acted sooner could have deducted points and given boro a play off place. But arguably Efl should have acted much sooner and the overspending would never have happened .

Would be interesting to see how that would play out in our case. We lost one-off playoff final games against 2 over-spending teams. I'd say we absolutely have a case that we were uniquely affected.

If there were anyt decent journalists left in this country, they might want to look into the links between Boro and the EFL - seems they have far more influence and leeway than other clubs.....something smells iffy...

In the civil courts and I guess this is where this is going it would be based on the balance of probabilities so they need to prove that it is more likley than not to have affected the run in.
This is not that easy to prove as you would need to factor in things such as other clubs overspending (Aston Villa, Leeds etc) during that period and the possible effect that might have the Derby overspend might have on the number of points obtained.  Also as said that bring in the playoffs is no guarantee of promotion. 

To be fair to Boro they really wanted Waghorn, which was why when he was available on a free over summer they rushed in to get him. They rated him that highly!
If they were successful on this then the can of worms would be well and truly opened and we could sue QPR, Villa and Bournemouth and the like. I think it is petty and ridiculous. Is Gibson suing Assombolonga for not scoring enough goals?
 
 
 
 

Being as Gibson has been to the EFL twice with 4 different attempts to due us and been told that he cannot because of EFL rules isn't it time that the EFL stepped in an charged him with bringing the game into disrepute. Or do Middlesbrough work under different rules where their players are allowed to elbow others in at least 2 matches, Gibson can make threats and the manager use foul and abusive language at the officials in nearly every match. I fear the latter is true.

Then surely their case should be against the EFL for failing to enfoirce their rules in a timely manner....though as they contributed to the delay, they're on a pretty sticky wicket....

We should be retrospectively taking both QPR and Aston Villa to court, how much money have they cost us by breaking the FFP rules the year we could have got promoted.
One could say that Mel saw QPR break the rules and pretty much get away with it and thought to hell with it, if they can do it we will.
We should try legal action against Ipswich for one of there players breaking Thornes leg, seeing as that probably cost us promotion.

I know their thinking (and morally you could argue their case), but there's absolutely nothing illegal in what we did (as far as a court of law goes) so I'm wondering what they are actually suggesting we've done that makes them think they have a legal case against us.....
Football is full of injustices (and blatant cheating) - if Boro can sue us (and win) it opens the floodgates for clubs to sue someone else for every percieved slight against them......