£10m FFP Bill

[EnigmaRam]

 Blah blah blah. Mel won’t let anything serious happen. I’m sure their are people employed at the club to deal with these matters

why is everyone getting their knickers in a twist

[ramblur]

6 hours ago, archied said:

All this back and forth stuff re debts / state of club ,,,, here’s my simple take that is the bottom line for me ,,, do derby county have legal debts that mel Morris could if he chose legally demand repayment on and have the club wound up by courts tomorrow? Are the club in debts anywhere else of this nature ? 

Seems to me this is what s being implied by ramnut and disputed by ramblur ,,, the rest is just the same as most clubs ie mel Morris could stop funding us and we would have to reduce spending drastically not just ffp related cuts ,,, you could say the same of pretty much every club in the country to varying degrees 

sorry to take it to such simple terms but for me that’s the crux of the matter ,

if the academy’s costs are not part of ffp figures where is the problem in mel Morris seeing it as his pet project that develops young players and could help the club long term ,, he perhaps gets real pleasure from this part of his spend on the club ,,, I’m failing to see the problem but perhaps that’s just me ?

Derby County owes Mel nothing but gratitude, so he can't demand anything from the Club. As at 30/6/17, an unsecured loan to the Co-Op Bank was still shown to be outstanding (#3m) -apologies, a cursed update seems to have fecked my keyboard , so I'll just have to use # until I fix it. This was brought out of ' other creditors' and reclassified as debt in 14/15, when the PP loan was settled, and is said to have no repayment date (which actually makes it payable at call) and no interest charged. This business has always intrigued me , because way back in 06/7 I remember Pete Gadsby mentioning #3m of Co-Op debt that had been set aside. One logical way of doing this would be to take it out of debt and dump it into other creditors ( which just happens to have increased by #3m in 06/07).

I've a suspicion, and only this, that the debt might only become payable if we were to become established in the Prem.

Should this ever be waived/ written off and converted into exceptional income, I'll truly start to believe in Santie again.

[ramblur]

4 hours ago, Ramet said:

Ramblur you are a ledge. Dont let these guys wind you up.people with less knoledge will always find it hard to follow.Mel as iv said before is going nowhere soon they should be thanking him for the money he has pumped into the club in a bid to move it forward.yes id be daft to say he hasnt made mistakes but with the cash hes put in he is the one that is taking account and footing the bill for his own mistakes. Ramnut is just concerned that mel will pack up and want him money back and i do understand that, but the investment in the academy is the only place that will come from. Mel is a very good businss man and will know that profit comes from good investment  and time.

Don't worry mate, he won't wind me up -in fact when I've gone through all his posts and highlighted all his drivel, I'm going to do something I should have done 2 years ago and make him the only person I've ever put on 'Ignore'. He seemed to have been thrilled by The Baron's article and has gone group/ consolidated mad. At least The Baron showed some accounting knowledge.

[Curtains]

The big question is do we have to sell to be a  sustainable Championship side and if we don’t and the club is healthy why did MM say we needed to cut costs recently!

[ramblur]

On 09/06/2018 at 21:11, RamNut said:

These were the figures that i'd seen but then i looked at the sevco accounts and got confused as to where the above figures were from.

for example the £16m profit on player sales seemed to be spread over two years. £7.2m in 2016/17 and £9m in 2915/16. No doubt @ramblur could explain it.

What was apparent was that:

• we were/are losing millions and are racking up a huge debt to MM.
• wages mushroomed to a totally unsustainable level
• there just isn't enough income to even get close to covering outgoings. The whole league looks bankrupt to me.

i would even question whether the £5-6m annual cost of the academy is affordable when turnover is £24m.

 

 

 

 

Pure bunkum, and just what to expect when you poke your unqualified snout into complex accounts. The Sevco accounts ( consolidated and company) spanned the period (10 months) from 1 Sept 16  to 30 June 17, and thus exclude the summer 16 transfer window. The consolidated accounts are pointless with regards to the club's activities, other than consolidating its figures along with other companies in the group. If you want to find out about Derby County, look at the Club's accounts, not the consolidated accounts.

[Animal is a Ram]

3 minutes ago, curtains said:

The big question is do we have to sell to be a  sustainable Championship side and if we don’t and the club is healthy why did MM say we needed to cut costs recently!

There's a difference between having to sell, and wanting to drop the wage bill.

I don't think it helps that Mel's comments have been interpreted by some doomsayers to mean that we're skint. We aren't. We just have to shop a bit more intelligently than we have done, especially under Clement. We've got a number of players who will be on significant wages, some of which have left already in Bent, Shackell and Baird.

We aren't in as dire a position as Villa, that's for sure.

[Curtains]

4 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

There's a difference between having to sell, and wanting to drop the wage bill.

I don't think it helps that Mel's comments have been interpreted by some doomsayers to mean that we're skint. We aren't. We just have to shop a bit more intelligently than we have done, especially under Clement. We've got a number of players who will be on significant wages, some of which have left already in Bent, Shackell and Baird.

We aren't in as dire a position as Villa, that's for sure.

It would be better if Mel didn’t say anything as it’s retrograde to club and managers. 

[Ramet]

10 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

There's a difference between having to sell, and wanting to drop the wage bill.

I don't think it helps that Mel's comments have been interpreted by some doomsayers to mean that we're skint. We aren't. We just have to shop a bit more intelligently than we have done, especially under Clement. We've got a number of players who will be on significant wages, some of which have left already in Bent, Shackell and Baird.

We aren't in as dire a position as Villa, that's for sure.

Well said that man

[ramblur]

On 09/06/2018 at 23:56, RamNut said:

@Carnero

here's another thing i don't quite get.....probably because i'm not an accountant, but the losses are frequently stated as £7.9m for 2016-17 and £14.9m for 2015-16.......

all detailed on p8 of the accounts.

i haven't read the article that sparked this but presumably that £36m loss for 15-16 is where the idea came from that we are losing £3m a month.yet the 2016-17 accounts state " the losses (for 16-17) after taxation amounted to £21,206,451, (2016 loss £36,117,241)"

i assume that the reduction in the loss for 2015-16 from £36m to £14.9m is explained by this gobbledegook....."in the prior year an impairment charge of £21,298,252 was made on the basis that goodwill in relation to acquisitions made during the year had a fair value of nil" . Ey?

a bit later it states......"included in other creditors is £95,609,218 owed to.....Melvyn Morris".

I don't understand it all, but it doesn't look good to my untrained eye.

 

 

 

 

As you;ve chosen to poke your large, untrained snout into things you don't understand, I've deleted the part relating to the irrelevant consolidated accounts for you.

As far as the impairment of goodwill goes, you obviously haven't a clue what this is about and which company within the group it relates to. I've no intention of wasting any more of my time trying to explain this to you.

Here's one for you, that you can get your immense untrained beak stuck into:-

The Sevco 5112 ( Company in its own right) recorded a profit of #60.7m in 15/16 ; Sevco 5113 recorded an operating profit of #60.096m in the same year, and Global Derby also recorded an operating profit of #60.096m in the same year. All 3 of these companies are consolidated within Sevco 5112. How can this be? Shouldn't we be concerned about all the companies in the Group?

#95.6m is owed to Mel by his own investment holding company, Sevco 5112, not the club.

[Ramet]

4 minutes ago, curtains said:

It would be better if Mel didn’t say anything as it’s retrograde to club and managers. 

If he didnt speak people like you would be at him for saying nothing. The bloke cant win.maybe its a ploy so that other clubs dont fleece us when bidding for a player,as we all know what happened when mel first arrived. But who knows.....

[Ramet]

2 minutes ago, ramblur said:

As you;ve chosen to poke your large, untrained snout into things you don't understand, I've deleted the part relating to the irrelevant consolidated accounts for you.

As far as the impairment of goodwill goes, you obviously haven't a clue what this is about and which company within the group it relates to. I've no intention of wasting any more of my time trying to explain this to you.

Here's one for you, that you can get your immense untrained beak stuck into:-

The Sevco 5112 ( Company in its own right) recorded a profit of #60.7m in 15/16 ; Sevco 5113 recorded an operating profit of #60.096m in the same year, and Global Derby also recorded an operating profit of #60.096m in the same year. All 3 of these companies are consolidated within Sevco 5112. How can this be? Shouldn't we be concerned about all the companies in the Group?

#95.6m is owed to Mel by his own investment holding company, Sevco 5112, not the club.

My god your good ramblur.

[Curtains]

2 minutes ago, Ramet said:

If he didnt speak people like you would be at him for saying nothing. The bloke cant win.maybe its a ploy so that other clubs dont fleece us when bidding for a player,as we all know what happened when mel first arrived. But who knows.....

No I wouldn’t as all his protestations are negative regarding finances IMO when managers are in situ 

[ramblur]

On 10/06/2018 at 06:52, RamNut said:

The sevco 5112 accounts state that they are the group accounts.

i understand that the ffp assessment is different and is massaged as certain losses/costs are excluded, but is the £7.9m loss the ffp result or supposedly the overall group result. 

Certainly the figures are very different to the £21.2m and £36.1m losses detailed in the accounts.

 

What do you expect when you stick your huge untrained beak into something you don't understand. Of course the consolidated figures are going to be different to the Club's figures. The group accounts aren't the Club's accounts.

[ramblur]

On 10/06/2018 at 07:15, RamNut said:

Still trying to understand this.

Is another explanation for the 2015-16 discrepancy for the £36m loss becoming a £14.9m loss accounted for by the increase in creditors from £73m to £95m. I.e. Mel stumped up £22m in one year to bring the losses in line with the ffp requirements?

@ramblur ?

 

If you don't understand things, I suggest you keep your beak out of them. We established a few posts ago that it was down to the impairment of goodwill.......... unless you think the same loss can be down to 2 equal things, that both equal the loss?

[ramblur]

On 10/06/2018 at 10:19, RamNut said:

@Carnero

That seems a bit like wishful thinking.

the sevco accounts discriminate between the company and the group. The group figures cover derby county's trading.

The point is, the losses are enornmous and probably show where the £3m loss per month figure originates from.

and if @ramblur Can confirm that a £36m loss became a £14.9m loss only because £21m was covered by mel and is recorded as a debt to the group, to be either written off or repaid by a future owner, then the real losses incurred are much higher and worrying.

Presumably next years accounts will show that the 16-17 £21.2m loss became a £7.9m loss with another £14m covered by mel and the debt to him further increases from £95m to £110m. I'm no accountant but i find these figures alarming. They suggest to me that we are far from sustainable. Comparing our accounts to aston villa it is apparent that the only way to cover these losses is with premier league tv money. Our income from tv was £7m (from memory). Villa received £48m presumably relating to the period before they got relegated. Thats why tv has ruined football. the finances throughout the championship do not work. The only way to cover losses is with the extra £40m of tv income.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Possibly your finest hour. I'm not going to repeat the impaired goodwill again. I don't even begin to understand the rest of the drivel, thus denying myself a really good laugh

[Ramet]

8 minutes ago, curtains said:

No I wouldn’t as all his protestations are negative regarding finances IMO when managers are in situ 

Thats rubbish. We have no idea what the conversations are with the managers

[Curtains]

4 minutes ago, ramblur said:

If you don't understand things, I suggest you keep your beak out of them. We established a few posts ago that it was down to the impairment of goodwill.......... unless you think the same loss can be down to 2 equal things, that both equal the loss?

Rambler everyone is entitled an opinion mate. 

What are people to think when MM says the current model in the Championship is not sustainable 

[Animal is a Ram]

25 minutes ago, curtains said:

It would be better if Mel didn’t say anything as it’s retrograde to club and managers. 

In part, I agree with this. It's a bit of a double edged sword, this transparency malarky.

As @Ramet said, fans bemoan a lack of transparency, however, it means that clubs may now see as a soft touch when selling, and low-ball us. 

That said, probably half the clubs in the championship are in a similar situation, some worse off (Villa), and a few better.

[RadioactiveWaste]

9 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

There's a difference between having to sell, and wanting to drop the wage bill.

I don't think it helps that Mel's comments have been interpreted by some doomsayers to mean that we're skint. We aren't. We just have to shop a bit more intelligently than we have done, especially under Clement. We've got a number of players who will be on significant wages, some of which have left already in Bent, Shackell and Baird.

We aren't in as dire a position as Villa, that's for sure.

I want to lose no more than £6-8m of my fortune a year on DCFC rather than "considerably more" every year.

Or in nottsspeak "ha ha ha derby are skint getting embargo lol bottlers two European cups"

[Curtains]

5 minutes ago, Ramet said:

Thats rubbish. We have no idea what the conversations are with the managers

Really.