JE90 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Hardly "heard it here first" as I've already pointed out that SR is alleged to have cited this figure at a recent fans gathering.For FFP purposes,£8m is the figure for this year,as opposed to that about to be reported on.Even if you'd got the correct year,the headline loss has to be adjusted for depreciation and net youth development expenditure,so a £8m headline loss would put us comfortably inside FFP. I'm aware you're the bees knees when it comes to football accounting on this forum, you definitely act like it anyway, but there's no need to be a total arse about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 I have a massive cock fact Any footage? About two footage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyB Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 The board's job is to get the club back into the Premier League. The investors didn't buy an English club to sit around in the second tier. The Premier League is where the money is and that's what the investors want. To this end the board have been poor so far. If we go up then that changes. It's that black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 The board's job is to get the club back into the Premier League. The investors didn't buy an English club to sit around in the second tier. The Premier League is where the money is and that's what the investors want. To this end the board have been poor so far. If we go up then that changes. It's that black and white. So every year 72 clubs have poor boards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyB Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 No, many football league boards don't have Premier League ambitions. But a lot in the Championship do. There's a lot more than 20 clubs want their snouts in the Premier League trough but only 20 at a time can get in there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 They pay the bills on time, players get paid, players are signed, they don't try to pick the team or force players on the manager and they are not talking ****** to the media. What more do you want?.....more investment? Yeah and if they gave us more people would still want more and more money guarantees nothing, just ask QPR and Forest fans. They get a thumbs up from me. Word perfect. But (at the risk of pushing it beyond what others may accept), this is why I've been supportive of the ownership for a while. Sure, it was a fair accusation that we "lacked ambition" and instead focused on the steady build from, and let's be honest about this, a pretty precarious financial position with a high wage, older and under performing squad. Nigel's remit was always to stay as competitive as possible while fixing the basis of the team. It seems to me the Academy was under-utilised and youth an afterthought. I still argue Nigel did an incredible job and we, as Derby fans owe him a considerable debt of gratitude. How many other managers would have so sacrificed his ambitions? And, while his limitations as such were pretty evident, I still feel for him that he lost his job as and when he did and I, for one, understand his bitterness. I hope that relationship can be repaired over time. That said, I do tend to think the PR release on the decision, possibly for the first time in the history of such things, was actually accurate in saying that Derby "needed a manager to take us to the next level". Harsh on Nigel - and 'suspiciously' timed to say the least coming at precisely the time that McClaren just happened to become free - but who could deny the superiority of his tactics and coaching methods? That all said, the real question will come next season and beyond whether we win promotion or not. If we do win promotion, surely we'd not fall for the same old trick of dismissing the manager (sorry, Head Coach) who got us there if we struggle to avoid relegation? History suggests that the easy way (to be seen to do something) outweighs the longer term strategic view. If we fail to win promotion, we will lose some of our prize youth and, depending upon the calibre of loanees replacing loanees (although I suspect McClaren's reputation will help us in this regard), we could easily have a step or two backwards. This is where the owners get a real thumbs up from me. They showed patience to stick to a plan under Nigel. How many other clubs would have allowed him to become the then longest serving manager in the Championship, as he was at the time he ceased to be a Championship manager (ie unceremoniously sacked), with his win/loss record? It seems to me they set standards for gradual progress (starting with cutting the wage bill but staying up) and then "upgraded". Even changes like restructuring the way fans are distributed at Pride Park (sorry, iPro) to (from what I hear at least) has greatly boosted the atmosphere. Smart move, simple improvement. I hope my theory is right. It would suggest they have a plan to return Derby to the Premiership, to be competitive in the Premiership, and to do so without risking the financial roller coaster that other clubs (and us) have been sucked into. I hope so anyway. And, if it's right, we will all be giving them the thumbs up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 The board's job is to get the club back into the Premier League. The investors didn't buy an English club to sit around in the second tier. The Premier League is where the money is and that's what the investors want. To this end the board have been poor so far. If we go up then that changes. It's that black and white. Isn't the logical extension of this argument that the board which presided over our promotion last time was GOOD. And the Board which presided over our 11 point relegation therefore BAD? But weren't they the same board? They were certainly the same ownership structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 If you love them so much why don't you marry them? I checked. Polygamy is still illegal in Australia. And in England. Nor could we decide which surname to give the kids. So we decided just to remain good friends. Come May, hopefully with benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Isn't the logical extension of this argument that the board which presided over our promotion last time was GOOD. And the Board which presided over our 11 point relegation therefore BAD? But weren't they the same board? They were certainly the same ownership structure. I thought LOG took us up and that GSE and Adam Pearson managed the descent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 I thought LOG took us up and that GSE and Adam Pearson managed the descent. Sorry, your recall is better than mine. GSE announced they'd bought us 28/1/2008 at which time we were bottom of the Premiership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyB Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 If the board's strategy is continual gradual growth then a couple of promotions and relegations while pocketing the parachute payments is a reasonable plan until the club can sustain Premier League football continuously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 If the board's strategy is continual gradual growth then a couple of promotions and relegations while pocketing the parachute payments is a reasonable plan until the club can sustain Premier League football continuously. Except it doesn't work like that. This is what everyone was going on about last time, as if promotion and relegation were as easy as going up and down in a lift. But in the process of losing week in, week out, everything falls to pieces. Managers leave, players leave, the fans get piissed off....and bouncing straight back up is far from easy too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyB Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 I would agree but if this was the plan all along and everyone held their nerve it could work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Except it doesn't work like that. This is what everyone was going on about last time, as if promotion and relegation were as easy as going up and down in a lift. But in the process of losing week in, week out, everything falls to pieces. Managers leave, players leave, the fans get piissed off....and bouncing straight back up is far from easy too. And you'll recall Leicester tried this. The problem is that players become reluctant to sign with a newly promoted club and insist upon even greater security which then 'corner' you and absorb too much of the parachute payments. Far better, I think, is the model where you use the Academy to generate players. A factory for future players and earnings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 I would agree but if this was the plan all along and everyone held their nerve it could work. In order for it to work, you would need to end each failed Premier League campaign in a stronger playing, managing and financial state than you started it. That would imply only 'minor' purchases once you got promoted - certainly not of a sufficiently high level for you to 'compete' - and yet you would still need to be able to perform to a level where the team wasn't demoralised. A bit like Blackpool did. Then when you come back down again, you need to be able to his the ground running, and take the Championship by storm. A bit like Blackpool didn't, because they seem to be in danger of 'doing a Wolves'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trooper Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 The board's job is to get the club back into the Premier League. The investors didn't buy an English club to sit around in the second tier. The Premier League is where the money is and that's what the investors want. To this end the board have been poor so far. If we go up then that changes. It's that black and white. What a load of ******... Board had balls to sack clough, n bring in Steve Mac, Money hasn't been freely available, so had to work to a budget, they listen to what fans want, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
needles Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 Owners are sound. So far as promotion is concerned, lets worry about that if and when we can get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyB Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 The board work on behalf of the investors. The investors want a return. The only way to get a return is in the Premier League. Therefore the boards job is to get promotion. Maybe the investors were happy to replace Glick with Rush? They were certainly happy Rush replaced Clough with McClaren, presumably with their blessing. There's little evidence of more money being put in to deliver promotion. And I suspect Burnley's success this season on a small budget will be held up as an excuse not to invest in the summer if we don 't go up. I don't trust the board or the investors to have Derby's best interests at heart but that's just my opinion. I can see why people are happy with them but I think they've had two very good managers in Clough and McClaren and this has covered up for their shortcomings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted March 30, 2014 Share Posted March 30, 2014 What a load of ******... Board had balls to sack clough, n bring in Steve Mac, Money hasn't been freely available, so had to work to a budget, they listen to what fans want, Board had the balls to appoint Clough and stick with him while he halved the wage bill and improved the club top to bottom...yay board! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 The board work on behalf of the investors. The investors want a return. The only way to get a return is in the Premier League. Therefore the boards job is to get promotion. Maybe the investors were happy to replace Glick with Rush? They were certainly happy Rush replaced Clough with McClaren, presumably with their blessing. There's little evidence of more money being put in to deliver promotion. And I suspect Burnley's success this season on a small budget will be held up as an excuse not to invest in the summer if we don 't go up. I don't trust the board or the investors to have Derby's best interests at heart but that's just my opinion. I can see why people are happy with them but I think they've had two very good managers in Clough and McClaren and this has covered up for their shortcomings. You have no idea what the board have been told, they may have been told that stability was required before promotion, so to speculate on whether they are doing good or bad is just that...pure speculation. Of course the end goal is Premier League but to state just that as their objective could be miles wide of the mark. On the point regarding them putting money in to fund a promotion push I reckon this could be the worst timed post of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.