Stadium deal provides funds.

[CrimsonRam]

In another news transfer funds available?

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Intelligence is having brains and a thinking capacity. Wisdom is having the ability to use it with discernment. Not many wise people out there!

[uttoxram75]

A few under-achievers in this thread blaming others in order to cover up their own shortcomings, perhaps?

Harsh there Eddie.

 

I have worked with managers who make decisions harmful to the company but beneficial to themselves, maybe a short term thing which may put them in good stead but ultimately costs the business money.

 

Their personal single-mindedness makes their colleagues and even the long term health of the whole organisation expendable. I think we saw that in the managers of the big banks and financial institutions. They were prepared to sacrifice the whole company, shareholders, employees and customers alike, to protect their own huge bonuses.

 

Not saying this is relevant to Rush in this situation but i think its the point the others were making.

[G STAR RAM]

I don't like it when people throw around the word very intelligent so casually. Very intelligent is a scientist or engineer. Looking at the world a different way to the majority of people and not accepting something as final. Trying to improve the world. Of course he isn't a moron but he is definitely someone you can not trust. He is in a position where morals don't mean much. You are set a goal, a target and you do whatever it takes to achieve that without questioning it or your own approach. 

 

 

Choosing to ignore morals or ethics does not make a person very intelligent. The success garnered in business is not representative of intelligence. Intelligence and business success is not linear, it is non-linear. 

 

 

Who can't trust him and for what reasons?

[eddie]

Harsh there Eddie.

 

I have worked with managers who make decisions harmful to the company but beneficial to themselves, maybe a short term thing which may put them in good stead but ultimately costs the business money.

 

Their personal single-mindedness makes their colleagues and even the long term health of the whole organisation expendable. I think we saw that in the managers of the big banks and financial institutions. They were prepared to sacrifice the whole company, shareholders, employees and customers alike, to protect their own huge bonuses.

 

Not saying this is relevant to Rush in this situation but i think its the point the others were making.

 

I think they are nitpicking, Utch.

 

I don't care if Sam Rush is the slimiest toad in the pond, provided he does his job. Perhaps a twirly waxed moustache would suit him more as opposed to a beard, and tying a young maiden to a railway line as the train is coming while the piano music plays and the screen flashes up the caption "Muhahahaha" would befit his evil persona instead of him being chief exec at a football club. Failing that, a cat and the words "No Mr Clough, I expect you to f*** off to Sheffield".

 

I have only had the 'pleasure' of dealing directly with Sam Rush once, and that was in attempting to put my case on behalf of one particular fan who happened to be disabled. I found him to be both thoughtful and responsive to my suggestions - the work parallel people have been attempting to make is perhaps quite apt because it almost felt like being involved in a grievance procedure at work. I approached it in a businesslike manner, so did he and the outcome was (I thought) beneficial - at least from my viewpoint. I suppose whether it was beneficial to DCFC is down to bums on seats (or wheelchairs) multiplied by price per buttock.

 

Sam's got a job to do - and if that job is to move this club forward, great. If in the process he makes a big impression on others and manages to brown-tongue his way into (say) the FA management hierarchy, that will have been partially due to the success achieved here at Derby. I fail to see the justification at present in comparing him to Murdo (and GSE to the Amigos, for that matter). I leave that sort of paranoia to others.

[ramblur]

Noticed that in the link SR compared the total allowable FFP losses for this year (£8m) to our result from last year,by which I presume he meant the last published result,unless he was letting the cat out of the bag for 12/13.The 11/12 published overall loss was just under £8m. He went on to say that although we were within the limit,we weren't romping home.

This would be ok if he were comparing like with like,but he wasn't.For the purposes of FFP,fixed asset depreciation and net youth development costs  must be removed from the published result.The depreciation came in at c£2m,in itself bringing the FFP equivalent result down to -£6m,and then there would be a sizeable deduction for youth development,so hardly scraping home.

[Cardifframs]

Now it all makes sense!

In Poirot,Were his final lines,sorry Madame et monsieurs,I have to leave for derby straight away.

My work is never ending,and I must attend the fans forums,as Monsieur Rush

[BOB BIGGS]

A few under-achievers in this thread blaming others in order to cover up their own shortcomings, perhaps?

I haven't got any shortcomings

[ladyram]

So if we made £8 mill in losses, is it likely the board will recoup the naming rights money for themselves resulting in it not being invested on the pitch?

Don't know how it works, just thinking out loud.

[Boycie]

I think the owners will only recoup extra investment (covering losses) when the club shows a profit. ( the prem )

If we get there, and I was an investor, I'd want my extra investments back at least. Plus interest.

[G STAR RAM]

Noticed that in the link SR compared the total allowable FFP losses for this year (£8m) to our result from last year,by which I presume he meant the last published result,unless he was letting the cat out of the bag for 12/13.The 11/12 published overall loss was just under £8m. He went on to say that although we were within the limit,we weren't romping home.

This would be ok if he were comparing like with like,but he wasn't.For the purposes of FFP,fixed asset depreciation and net youth development costs  must be removed from the published result.The depreciation came in at c£2m,in itself bringing the FFP equivalent result down to -£6m,and then there would be a sizeable deduction for youth development,so hardly scraping home.

 

At a recent forum John Vicars said we are currently very borderline with FFP, he said 6 clubs are currently breaching and this was expected to be 10 or 12 by the end of this season.

[mwram1973]

but he is definitely someone you can not trust

 

 

Based on what exactly??

[Srg]

Based on what exactly??

 

He saw us underachieving so made moves to correct it... the swine!!!

[needles]

BBC article today quotes average Championship wages to be about £4k to £5k per week, with the top earners on £8k to £9k (source PFA). Obviously there are some significant outliers at QPR, florist, and other big payers but if that's the case at Derby, and I'd guess it isn't far wrong, then this deal pays for a top player and a squad man. Not too shabby when you look at it that way.

[PrivateDerby]

So it's a good deal then? Blimey, we'll be rolling in it when the other 7-8k decide we've got a chance.

[Srg]

BBC article today quotes average Championship wages to be about £4k to £5k per week, with the top earners on £8k to £9k (source PFA). Obviously there are some significant outliers at QPR, florist, and other big payers but if that's the case at Derby, and I'd guess it isn't far wrong, then this deal pays for a top player and a squad man. Not too shabby when you look at it that way.

 

But they would be free transfers at that... so people won't be happy!!

[ramblur]

At a recent forum John Vicars said we are currently very borderline with FFP, he said 6 clubs are currently breaching and this was expected to be 10 or 12 by the end of this season.

Whilst what Vicars may have said about the current situation doesn't change what Rush said about a previous year,I do find it interesting.For 13/14 allowable FFP losses total £8m (£3m acceptable deviation +up to £5m extra if matched quid pro quo with equity injection).If we are currently borderline,then that must mean that our projected overall published loss must be coming in at least £10m,and probably nearer £11m.This is because fixed asset depreciation comes in at c£2m,with the unknown net youth development expenditure on top,both of which are discounted for FFP purposes.This might also indicate that an underlying cash loss would have jumped from c£3m to £5/6m,which I find surprising.Anyway,we'll find out when these accounts are published in about 14 months,although a big money player outgoing in Jan would muddy the waters.

 

Going back to what Rush said about "last year",we don't know if he meant last published year or 12/13,and we don't know if he meant headline loss in the accounts,or FFP loss. As I said before,the published 11/12 loss of £8m doesn't equate to FFP,and its FFP equivalent appears to be closer to romping than borderline.If he meant 12/13,then we'll be able to check this in a couple of months.

 

I get the uneasy feeling that Rush is trying to give the impression that we're availing of all available FFP losses ,when we might not be.My own suspicion is that we're trying to pitch at acceptable deviation only.However,the beauty of FFP is that we can look at the cash flow statement each year to see if any equity has been introduced.If it hasn't,then we've either utilised none of the available equity matched losses,or been non compliant.(although a look at the headline loss might clarify).

[ramblur]

BBC article today quotes average Championship wages to be about £4k to £5k per week, with the top earners on £8k to £9k (source PFA). Obviously there are some significant outliers at QPR, florist, and other big payers but if that's the case at Derby, and I'd guess it isn't far wrong, then this deal pays for a top player and a squad man. Not too shabby when you look at it that way.

Do you have a link please,needles?

[needles]

Do you have a link please,needles?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24937449

The average wage thing is a side box 3/4 of the way down the piece.

[ramblur]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24937449

The average wage thing is a side box 3/4 of the way down the piece.

Thanks needles.Bit of a sketchy statistic as far as top earners go,in that we don't know what was used as the minimum starting salary to define a top earner,and thus work out an average.However,assuming the £7m to come at £700k/annum,you'd probably be ok in saying it would pay the wages of a decent player and a squad player