Sexydadbod Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 Just now, SuperDerbySuperRams said: Keogh has been better this season than last season, so I don’t think that logic can be applied to every player in the world. He’s 31 not 41, i’d say he’s still in his prime years. The forwards I agree could be an issue with losing speed but I don’t think the age issue applies to CH’s and midfielders, especially Keogh and Davies What are the 5 new positions? I’d argue a case for a left back, striker and wide man, but can’t think of another area. Vydra is too good to be figured out. His form in November/December was just frightening. Just needs get fit and hopefully the international break will have sorted that out! Left back, striker, 2 wingers, midfielder with energy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sexydadbod Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 Possibly another right back too if/when Baird retires, ideally who is attacking and maybe another back up centre back who is young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperDerbySuperRams Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 5 minutes ago, McLovin said: Left back, striker, 2 wingers, midfielder with energy Don’t agree with that, but you’re entitled to your opinion. Can see Winnall signing and then 2 more coming in. Thomas can be used as an option out wide, Elsnik the midfielder with energy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaside Sam Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 36 minutes ago, SuperDerbySuperRams said: God some people are getting a bit melodramatic. People are acting like our squad isn’t competing this season, it is. Looking at the squads in the division, the only argument for a side above us that we should be ahead of is Cardiff. The rest have better squads than us. I don’t get this identity rubbish. People keep harping on about our ageing squad, when the vast majority of our older players have been our best players this season. @McLovin I’m not sure about Forest and their “identity”. They were rubbish a few weeks back, and relied on a 29 year old loanee to be their only threat. I don’t see any young player at Forest that would get anywhere near our 11. Morris mentioned significant investment. That doesn’t mean we won’t add to the squad. A few u23’s into the squad, as well as a few hungry lower league additions and I don’t see why we won’t compete next season if we stay down. Think some people just need to calm down a tad, they don’t know how good we’ve had it over the last 5 years, despite the disappointment. absolutely nob on,i don't know what half of rams fans are on but i wouldn't mind some myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaside Sam Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 20 minutes ago, SuperDerbySuperRams said: Promotion? What would you like us to be building towards? I have a dream ------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretDave Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 The truth is, we've made some bad mistakes in the transfer market in the past few years. Gary is doing his best to get things sorted, and I have every faith he is the man for the job. We all need to keep the faith and stay patient. I for one will enjoy seeing us promote young players in to the team and going for some lower league bargains if that is the way forward. I'm fed up of having to go for over priced disappointments. Mel might have made a few mistakes along the way, but he has put his money where his mouth is, nobody can deny that. I'm sure he will learn from his mistakes in the past - how many people out there get things right first time around generally in life? Lots of clubs would love to be in our shoes. Look at where Blackpool and Coventry City are with terrible owners, at least our owner does care about the club. I'm going to look forward to the rest of the season now. Fingers crossed we can get to the promised land, but if not, I look forward to the future - and getting an exciting squad together. If it takes a few years to go up, so be it. Let's just do things right and not risk the clubs future by getting in to debt we can't get out of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CornwallRam Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 4 hours ago, reveldevil said: The signing of players including Matej Vydra, David Nugent and Ikechi Anya were made during the two transfer windows in the year which boosted balance sheet intangible assets to £42.6m from £33.5m. The sales of Jeff Hendrick, Lee Grant, Will Hughes and Tom Ince in this financial year contributed to a profit on player registrations of £16.2m. So we had to push Hughes and Ince out the door as early as possible during the summer, otherwise our loss of £6.9m would have been far in excess of £13m? So this season Christie has covered Wisdom fee wise, so we've got to find £5.2m for Lawrence, £2m for Huddlestone, 500k Davies, £1.5m for Jerome. I don't see how we can take a hit of £9m+ on transfers alone and stay within FFP, seeing as we made a profit of over £16m on transfers last year, and still lost nearly £7m quid. **** or bust this season, imo. Transfer fees don't directly affect profit and loss. Although we've spent some cash (or committed to instalments), we've gained an asset - the player's registration. It's like when you buy a car. You can spend £20k on a shiny new car. However, you're net financial worth is unchanged. You are light by £20k but you have an asset worth £20k so you have not made a loss. The loss actually then develops as the car begins to depreciate. After year 1 you have probably lost £5k, year 2 £8k, year 3 £10k etc. Unless you sell the car, you will eventually lose all £20k, but it is a gradual process. Transfer fees are accounted for by a gradual diminution of a player's 'book value' over the course of his contract. It used to be a staight cost/years of contract, but now they try to reflect more of a realistic picture by weighting the loss according to age, form and years left on contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodle Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 3 hours ago, SecretDave said: The truth is, we've made some bad mistakes in the transfer market in the past few years. Gary is doing his best to get things sorted, and I have every faith he is the man for the job. We all need to keep the faith and stay patient. I for one will enjoy seeing us promote young players in to the team and going for some lower league bargains if that is the way forward. I'm fed up of having to go for over priced disappointments. Mel might have made a few mistakes along the way, but he has put his money where his mouth is, nobody can deny that. I'm sure he will learn from his mistakes in the past - how many people out there get things right first time around generally in life? Lots of clubs would love to be in our shoes. Look at where Blackpool and Coventry City are with terrible owners, at least our owner does care about the club. I'm going to look forward to the rest of the season now. Fingers crossed we can get to the promised land, but if not, I look forward to the future - and getting an exciting squad together. If it takes a few years to go up, so be it. Let's just do things right and not risk the clubs future by getting in to debt we can't get out of. It’s ok making mistakes, as you state we all do. The key, however is to learn from them. Paying money for Jerome and extending contracts to the likes of Forsyth, demonstrate we may not be learning quickly enough though. I’m looking forward to the youngsters making the team. The expectations will lower and the success will be all the sweeter should it come Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 28 minutes ago, CornwallRam said: Transfer fees don't directly affect profit and loss. Although we've spent some cash (or committed to instalments), we've gained an asset - the player's registration. It's like when you buy a car. You can spend £20k on a shiny new car. However, you're net financial worth is unchanged. You are light by £20k but you have an asset worth £20k so you have not made a loss. The loss actually then develops as the car begins to depreciate. After year 1 you have probably lost £5k, year 2 £8k, year 3 £10k etc. Unless you sell the car, you will eventually lose all £20k, but it is a gradual process. Transfer fees are accounted for by a gradual diminution of a player's 'book value' over the course of his contract. It used to be a staight cost/years of contract, but now they try to reflect more of a realistic picture by weighting the loss according to age, form and years left on contract. I knew that, yet didn't take it into account when posting! Stupid mistake, but I think my first point about the outgoings pushing us below the FFP tipping point is still valid, especially as Ince aside, there was no transfer outlay on the other 3 players on our part, leaving aside agent fees etc. If I'm wrong, please point out how, as I'm trying to understand something I probably shouldn't, but that's how we all learn (or at least I do)! Another point if I may? How would someone like George Thorne be treated accounting wise? My guess is he cost around £4m, and signed a 4 year deal, so would cost around £1m a year under the old system, and God knows what under the new one, but now he's signed an extension does he revert to whatever value the club place on him, upto his transfer fee? If so, would it have been better to let his contract run out, then re-sign him, as his book value would be zero? Apologies in advance for the questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritty Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 My logic (which @ramblur may well correct) is: Derby's accounts revealed a loss of £7.9m but the club's wage bill increased by £1.5m to £34.6m. This loss was despite a profit on transfers of £16.2m. Put another way, if we'd been flat on transfers, the loss would have been £24.1mn. If you assume wages are the main variable expenditure, that means even Derby (with some of the highest crowds in the division and one of highest commercial incomes outside of those on parachute payments) cold sustainably manage a wage bill of £10mn FFP limit is 13mn a year on average (over 3 years) and if MM was content to just lose that every single year (which he's not), that would imply that even if we were flat on transfers we could manage a wage bill of £24mn a year on average (over 3 years) So even with zero net investment in players we need to lose 10mn a year off the wage bill, or we need to make a profit of £10mn a year on transfers; or a bit of both. The fact we were under FFP this year gives us a little wiggle room next year, but I think we'll have to make a profit on sales again. Happy for someone to tell me where my logic goes awry!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritty Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 4 hours ago, McLovin said: Left back, striker, 2 wingers, midfielder with energy Lowe, New purchase, Thomas, Gordon, Elsnik/Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritty Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 Right. I'm now going to download 'football manager 18' and work out how to sort us out. I'll post back once I've cracked it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritstone Ram Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 If the wage bill was high last year add the likes of Huddlestone, Davies, Wisdom and Jerome wages in next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 30 minutes ago, feisty said: My logic (which @ramblur may well correct) is: Derby's accounts revealed a loss of £7.9m but the club's wage bill increased by £1.5m to £34.6m. This loss was despite a profit on transfers of £16.2m. Put another way, if we'd been flat on transfers, the loss would have been £24.1mn. If you assume wages are the main variable expenditure, that means even Derby (with some of the highest crowds in the division and one of highest commercial incomes outside of those on parachute payments) cold sustainably manage a wage bill of £10mn FFP limit is 13mn a year on average (over 3 years) and if MM was content to just lose that every single year (which he's not), that would imply that even if we were flat on transfers we could manage a wage bill of £24mn a year on average (over 3 years) So even with zero net investment in players we need to lose 10mn a year off the wage bill, or we need to make a profit of £10mn a year on transfers; or a bit of both. The fact we were under FFP this year gives us a little wiggle room next year, but I think we'll have to make a profit on sales again. Happy for someone to tell me where my logic goes awry!? Sorry, been ill in bed all day and not long surfaced - feel pretty ghastly so not going to say too much. I think you're maybe missing FFP exemptions from your analysis, but my head's just too fuzzy to concentrate properly. Can't get my head round these increased revenues, a lot of which is down to Stadia DCFC, which reported a loss of £2.6m+ for the year. It seems to me that either the expenses must be £2.6m more than these great revenues (which wouldn't be particularly great), or the revenues go to DCFC Ltd, with the expenditure being recorded in Stadia DCFC, which looks to be more pea brained thinking from me, particularly as that company shows a large debtors figure (doesn't affect profits though). Another £2m+ loss reported by Stadia DCFC Ltd is hard to square with increased revenues. As Club DCFC was mentioned, it looks to me that the club has reported on the consolidated figures, rather than the club only figures. On the transfer profit side of things, I see no mention of the substantial CM loan fee. Very surprised that overall wages went up a bit, as I expected player wages to have fallen a bit (and they still could have, if other wages had risen). Had a quick look, and the accounts haven't landed at CH yet, which gives me time to recover. Please don't ask me anything tonight, as I probably shouldn't even have posted this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie George Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 7 hours ago, McLovin said: It will take 5 years to get a team together to push for another promotion race. You heard it here first. All of Nigel Clough’s hard work has been out to waste. The team is far too old and the recruitment has been far too sighted. Vydra will be sold and we will have no-one who can score because Nugent and Jerome are rubbish and finished at this level. The good players like Keogh, Huddlestone, Ledley and Davies will be a year older and will further decline as they will be coming to the end of their careers. Very worrying times for Derby County. The earlier people start to realise this, the better. Couldn't agree with you more. Vydra are only saleable asset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 Quote The scouting agreements, described by Derby as a 'sham', were made with a number of agencies and agents, with Rush's former employers at the Wasserman Media Group among them. The fees totalled £2.079m for agreements allegedly negotiated solely by Rush without the consent of the footballing committee or Morris. Derby claim they received no written scouting reports with the exception of a file on possible targets in France from WMG. This was the one product, claim Derby, of a £1.115m USA and French scouting agreement with WMG but was dismissed by club officials when players recommended included Kylian Mbappe and Ousmane Dembele. With a combined value of £265m, the claim points out, the pair were not exactly within Derby's reach. The Derby claim states that in the absence of any other scouting reports it can be 'inferred that each of the scouting agreements was a sham'. 'Instead, these transactions operated no more than as a conduit for the making of additional payments to the recipients under the disguise of the justification of being a payment under a scouting agreement,' the claim says, adding that it can be 'inferred that the surreptitious nature of these transactions reveals their real, unauthorised status'. Other consultancy agreements highlighted by the claim include a £723,410 deal with WMG for commercial services for Derby's academy and other payments to agents. Is that sum anywhere in your 'mystery' accounts amounts @ramblur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretDave Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 12 hours ago, Charlie George said: Couldn't agree with you more. Vydra are only saleable asset. Me might get a bit of cash for Craig Bryson, Chris Martin and Nick Blackman too. Hopefully Jacob Butterfield, though not sure Sheffield Wednesday would keep him. Who knows, someone might fancy taking a punt on Weimann. Vydra is definitely our most saleable asset though. If we do sell him, we need to make sure we get crazy money for him because he's certainly worth it in this division. I'm talking £15m+. Of course, none of this will be an issue if we get promoted though. So for now, let's just get behind the lads and worry about the summer later. COYR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 2 hours ago, RoyMac5 said: Is that sum anywhere in your 'mystery' accounts amounts @ramblur? They say that everything comes to he who waits. Some time ago I made a (pretty poor) attempt to try and work out the transfer cost of GT. As part of that process, I looked at the total transfer incomings in the accounts, which is split between registrations and League levy/ agents' fees/ compensation paid to other clubs for services of coaches/manager. I found the total for agents' fees online and could work out the levy from the 1st column, but this left me £2m+ short (in fact very similar to an amount mentioned in the Rush thread). At first I thought it was PC compo, but then I looked at a PBSE figure (going up to March 05- I forgot to mention we're talking about 04/05 here) and realized that this total for transfer activities almost equated to the total in the accounts, thus ruling out PC compo. I said this was bugging me, and would continue to do so for ages, and people told me to try and forget it. Well I did, but only because I had a sneaking feeling that the explanation might come out when details of the Rush business did. I wondered at the time if there might be some kind of payments to agents (or their like), not reflected in the 'official' agents' fees figure, but daren't suggest anything so controversial in writing at the time. I now feel that such a question is at least justified, given the revelations and a figure of £2m+ being quoted. Don't forget, this was the year that SM recruited a lot of young players for the Academy. Someone recently mentioned that these players cost very little - I smiled to myself and mentioned wages, but kept my mouth shut about the other possibility. I still feel pretty rotten, so won't say much more on the accounts ( just a small bit of analysis to follow this post). I don't really want to say too much until I've seen the full accounts for DCFC & Sevco 5112 (the consolidator),and it seems these won't be released till after Easter, which rather suits me).One thing I would say is that I'm a little disappointed the club hasn't released the actual FFP result, in conjunction with the headline loss, which they'd done in the previous 2 years. Some time ago I exchanged emails with a guy running an FFP website, mostly talking about FFP exemptions. When I told the fella that our club was disclosing the actual FFP results, he was most effusive in his praise, and wished that other clubs would be as open. The trouble is, when you do things and then stop, it can cause suspicion about the reason for same. I remember the previous regime gave the players' wages figure for a time, and then stopped. I wasn't overly impressed with the reason Glick gave at the time, and concluded he didn't want us to know (on an ongoing basis) the extent to which players' wages were being cut (only my opinion ,of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 16 hours ago, feisty said: Right. I'm now going to download 'football manager 18' and work out how to sort us out. I'll post back once I've cracked it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 6 minutes ago, eddie said: We have no money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.