Fans Forum @ Nunsfield House in Alvaston 27/3/19

[Spanish]

23 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

Is that still true? They seemed to be saying that it wasn't called "Financial Fair Play" any more but "Profitability & Sustainability"

That suggests the focus is moving away from levelling the playing field (admitting that things will never be "level" due to the mammoth parachute payments) - and more towards making sure the clubs don't spend in an unsustainable way

if not FFP can we call it pis?

[AdamRam]

25 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

Is that still true? They seemed to be saying that it wasn't called "Financial Fair Play" any more but "Profitability & Sustainability"

That suggests the focus is moving away from levelling the playing field (admitting that things will never be "level" due to the mammoth parachute payments) - and more towards making sure the clubs don't spend in an unsustainable way

Your are correct they have done something with the name. My point was more around just because you are within the limits doesn’t mean you are well run.

How many of the current clubs in admin or financial difficulties and within the limits, are they also being well run ?

[ilkleyram]

1 hour ago, Nuwtfly said:

Are they smug? I don't really get that impression, so what makes you say that?

I think Ed and Craig can get a bit emotive at the games - but I don't understand why that's suddenly become such a problem? Didn't see many complaints when they were rightly pulling apart Rowett's choices/tactics last season. 

A club telling the local media how to behave just doesn't sit right with me. 

But freedom to comment cuts both ways. If RD, in the form of Ed and Ramage, are allowed to comment on style of play, results, performance and selection and encourage the Derek's of this world, then so too are DCFC people allowed to comment on what RD say and how they say it.

I haven't heard Mel, Frank or anyone else from DCFC, call for anything other than some positive support of the team, saying that the players on the pitch benefit from and play better when they feel supported. I heard Frank say that he doesn't mind criticism but would like it to be constructive. There's been no comment about their style of commentary. 

If that's telling the local media how to behave then they're setting a pretty low bar

[ramsbottom]

1 hour ago, StivePesley said:

Is that still true? They seemed to be saying that it wasn't called "Financial Fair Play" any more but "Profitability & Sustainability"

That suggests the focus is moving away from levelling the playing field (admitting that things will never be "level" due to the mammoth parachute payments) - and more towards making sure the clubs don't spend in an unsustainable way

Two words - Salary cap...

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, Nuwtfly said:

Loads of really positive soundbites from that fans forum/PR exercise, but I do find the seemingly building tension between club and local media quite uncomfortable.

The media should be allowed to speak about the club without being influenced by them, and even telling people "say what you like but be positive" doesn't really sit right with me. "All the deamons are on the outside..." Deamons? Really, Mel?

Free press n'all that. 

And on the other hand DCFC are well within their rights to comment on Radio Derby then...

[cheron85]

2 hours ago, AdamRam said:

FFP is designed though to keep the league competitive, not a bench mark on how the club is run. We are still losing several million per month, so I’m not sure how that demonstrates the club is being run well ?

The club are looking for investment to take us forward because the losses imo will become unsustainable at some point, not sure that staying within FFP really has anything to do with that other than curb our spending ?

Just wanted to check (because I've missed 33 pages of this thread) - Where did you get that from?

I only saw the DET article post fans forum (briefly skimmed) but they said:

Derby reported losses of £7.9m in 2016-17, and £14.7m in 2015-16.

That amounts to £22.6m over two years, seemingly leaving them with a buffer of £16.4m before they exceed the £39m mark.

So assuming we are only just compliant I make that losing just over £1m per month in 17-18 - And if that's the case and they're confident of our compliance for 18-19 we must be losing less than £1m a month on average to still come out as compliant...

If you're losing £2m a month of 3 years that's £72m in losses - We made a small amount in sales but not enough to fill that kind of hole surely?

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

3 hours ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Radio Derby get a lot of stick and most of it uncalled for.

They don't have the luxury of pictures or flashy moving replays, they are having to describe what they are seeing.

If after the 10th successive backwards pass Ramage gets frustrated he is probably sharing my same frustration.

If we are playing crap I want to be told that, if we are playing well please let me know.

We just don’t need to know that a crisp packet is flying around the pitch and that it looks like a new walkers flavour that is limited edition. 

I understand your point though but they don’t half talk some drivel. 

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, cheron85 said:

Just wanted to check (because I've missed 33 pages of this thread) - Where did you get that from?

I only saw the DET article post fans forum (briefly skimmed) but they said:

Derby reported losses of £7.9m in 2016-17, and £14.7m in 2015-16.

That amounts to £22.6m over two years, seemingly leaving them with a buffer of £16.4m before they exceed the £39m mark.

So assuming we are only just compliant I make that losing just over £1m per month in 17-18 - And if that's the case and they're confident of our compliance for 18-19 we must be losing less than £1m a month on average to still come out as compliant...

If you're losing £2m a month of 3 years that's £72m in losses - We made a small amount in sales but not enough to fill that kind of hole surely?

might be they are mentally writing off some players values who are out of contract in 18-19 to 0, That would add to any ongoing monthly losses. Usually when organisations talk about on-going losses they are are referring to monthly expenditure exceeding monthly income, but there are then th exceptional items that you only work out once each year..... 

[AdamRam]

1 hour ago, cheron85 said:

Just wanted to check (because I've missed 33 pages of this thread) - Where did you get that from?

I only saw the DET article post fans forum (briefly skimmed) but they said:

Derby reported losses of £7.9m in 2016-17, and £14.7m in 2015-16.

That amounts to £22.6m over two years, seemingly leaving them with a buffer of £16.4m before they exceed the £39m mark.

So assuming we are only just compliant I make that losing just over £1m per month in 17-18 - And if that's the case and they're confident of our compliance for 18-19 we must be losing less than £1m a month on average to still come out as compliant...

If you're losing £2m a month of 3 years that's £72m in losses - We made a small amount in sales but not enough to fill that kind of hole surely?

You are right in that I was estimating that figure, until the accounts come out there is nothing that has been said that would back that figure up.  Accounting is not my area, so I will most definitely concede if someone tells me that this is less than 2m without push back.

[Archied]

20 hours ago, Mafiabob said:

Mate, it’s getting ridiculous from campaigners, the rank hypocrisy of some is horrible. Been on the end of all sorts of terrible quotes about what I do, just because I take responsibility 

Yep your spot on ,, addiction is a horrible disease but very few of us don’t rach the point where we have to make a choice to carry on or do whatever it takes to stop 

[Rampage]

Bournemouth's wage bill last year was £101.8 million!  Lost £10 million last year. Stupid maths. Do we really want this way of going on without a billionaire sugar daddy. Wolves lost £75 million last year, I think. All sounds improbable. Cannot be true. 

[Poynton ram]

when are the annual accounts published, surely soon?

[AdamRam]

2 minutes ago, Rampage said:

Bournemouth's wage bill last year was £101.8 million!  Lost £10 million last year. Stupid maths. Do we really want this way of going on without a billionaire sugar daddy. Wolves lost £75 million last year, I think. All sounds improbable. Cannot be true. 

In Bournemouth’s case they bought a golf complex and paid a token gesture to the football league which accounted for the majority of the losses. Wolves have only just got promoted, the P&L I’m sure will have a completely different look about it next time around.

Football is massive business, if you like a good white paper then this is definitely worth a read, and it’s going to get bigger no doubt about it.

These figures also show why clubs are prepared to risk breaking rules to get a piece of the pie, and also prepared to gamble once they have that slice, I wonder if there is any other model reliant on a sunny day in May in London, that would result in over 100 million in revenue for the business.

https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/cz/Documents/consumer-business/Deloitte-Football-Money-League-2019.pdf

 

[G STAR RAM]

15 hours ago, cheron85 said:

Just wanted to check (because I've missed 33 pages of this thread) - Where did you get that from?

I only saw the DET article post fans forum (briefly skimmed) but they said:

Derby reported losses of £7.9m in 2016-17, and £14.7m in 2015-16.

That amounts to £22.6m over two years, seemingly leaving them with a buffer of £16.4m before they exceed the £39m mark.

So assuming we are only just compliant I make that losing just over £1m per month in 17-18 - And if that's the case and they're confident of our compliance for 18-19 we must be losing less than £1m a month on average to still come out as compliant...

If you're losing £2m a month of 3 years that's £72m in losses - We made a small amount in sales but not enough to fill that kind of hole surely?

Don't forget there are things that are excluded from the FFP calculation such as academy expenditure. I believe on Thursday MM said we had spent £24m on this since his takeover so that could amount to something like £500k per month 

[Ewe Ram]

18 hours ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Radio Derby get a lot of stick and most of it uncalled for.

They don't have the luxury of pictures or flashy moving replays, they are having to describe what they are seeing.

If after the 10th successive backwards pass Ramage gets frustrated he is probably sharing my same frustration.

If we are playing crap I want to be told that, if we are playing well please let me know.

It’s not about whether they get frustrated, it’s because they simply need to tell us what’s happening on the pitch and do much less of their opinions on things. I’m not interested in what they like or don’t like, don’t care that Rammage played for us and Dawes likes trains, save that for before and after when I can turn off - just tell me what is happening (not what you think should be happening either)! 

[Comrade 86]

1 hour ago, Ewe Ram said:

It’s not about whether they get frustrated, it’s because they simply need to tell us what’s happening on the pitch and do much less of their opinions on things. I’m not interested in what they like or don’t like, don’t care that Rammage played for us and Dawes likes trains, save that for before and after when I can turn off - just tell me what is happening (not what you think should be happening either)! 

Sorry @Ewe Ram but what you appear to be saying is that you expect commentators to commentate. What an outlandish notion! ?

[richinspain]

1 hour ago, Ewe Ram said:

It’s not about whether they get frustrated, it’s because they simply need to tell us what’s happening on the pitch and do much less of their opinions on things. I’m not interested in what they like or don’t like, don’t care that Rammage played for us and Dawes likes trains, save that for before and after when I can turn off - just tell me what is happening (not what you think should be happening either)! 

 

41 minutes ago, 86 points said:

Sorry @Ewe Ram but what you appear to be saying is that you expect commentators to commentate. What an outlandish notion! ?

Although I agree that the commentators should stick to commentating, surely the point of having an expert(I'll let others decide if Rammage is an expert, personally I like him) is tell us what the team is doing right or wrong and what they can do to remedy it?

[Comrade 86]

1 minute ago, richinspain said:

surely the point of having an expert

 

1 minute ago, richinspain said:

is tell us what the team is doing right or wrong

 

2 minutes ago, richinspain said:

I'll let others decide if Rammage is an expert

Think you've answered your own question there Rich

[Ewe Ram]

4 hours ago, richinspain said:

 

Although I agree that the commentators should stick to commentating, surely the point of having an expert(I'll let others decide if Rammage is an expert, personally I like him) is tell us what the team is doing right or wrong and what they can do to remedy it?

But that’s a matter of opinion and I don’t care for their opinions. Adam Bolder was guest and he was much better. 

[KCG]

13 minutes ago, Ewe Ram said:

But that’s a matter of opinion and I don’t care for their opinions. Adam Bolder was guest and he was much better. 

He was boring.