Mel Morris to put the club up for sale SHOULD Derby fail to win promotion....

[MackworthRamIsGod]

8 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

Find it hilarious and sadly fashionable to say Rowett “destroyed” the team etc when we were pretty much one game away from the Premier League last season..... still folk living that Mac 13/14 dream......

 

We were actually 45 minutes from Wembley, all he needed to do was show some attacking intent in that second half and I honestly think We would have held onto the 1-0 against Fulham.

Rowett, for reasons only he will know?was clearly happy to sit back for 90 minutes do sod all and disapear in the comfort of knowing he was off to stoke anyway.

[SSD]

14 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

Find it hilarious and sadly fashionable to say Rowett “destroyed” the team etc when we were pretty much one game away from the Premier League last season..... still folk living that Mac 13/14 dream......

 

Definitely destroyed my mind having to watch kick and rush every weekend.

[Ramleicester]

The whole point of FFP was to avoid owners coming into clubs running up huge debts, taking the revenue and then walking away. Also of course to avoid rich owners giving a team an unfair advantage.

If an owner keeps putting money in to cover losses then a club can loose 39 mil over three years. The owner injects cash up to that limit which is used to buy shares in the club which covers the loses. Often the shares are also loan funded too which creates a debt to the owner.

Mels dilema is simple. His nose is pushed against the £39 mil limit. He cant invest any more without likely points deductions. To take the team further in terms of being able to make cash available for players the only option is a NEW investor who has the ability to put in cash which can be regarded as revenue not investment.

A new owner would buy out Mels investment / Debt but this would not change FFP one bit. The only way is for the new investor to be able to justify to the FFP authorities that something like a big sponsorship deal is legit income not investment.

Good example of that is Leicester where the owner also owned massive businesses in the far east and he could legitamately invest 25mil under the revenue stream of sponsorship.

Mel is looking for that type of new owner. It is the only option. Indeed without it the FFP assessment may lead to a Birmingham situation next season.

[AdamRam]

1 hour ago, Mafiabob said:

Find it hilarious and sadly fashionable to say Rowett “destroyed” the team etc when we were pretty much one game away from the Premier League last season..... still folk living that Mac 13/14 dream......

 

Will Hughes, end of discussion ?

[Mafiabob]

8 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

Will Hughes, end of discussion ?

He would have gone anyway, it was his time to go..... irrelevant of who was in charge

[Mafiabob]

1 hour ago, SouthStandDan said:

Definitely destroyed my mind having to watch kick and rush every weekend.

As I say, fashionable to criticise the bloke, he did a good job here..... if we were playing amazing football every week yet the results didn’t match and we sat 15-16th would you call for manager to go or stay 

[Mafiabob]

1 hour ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

We were actually 45 minutes from Wembley, all he needed to do was show some attacking intent in that second half and I honestly think We would have held onto the 1-0 against Fulham.

Rowett, for reasons only he will know?was clearly happy to sit back for 90 minutes do sod all and disapear in the comfort of knowing he was off to stoke anyway.

Maybe he had his reasons for going to Stoke..... but I’ll concede yep the tactics in that away leg I’ll agree with

[Rev]

1 hour ago, Ramleicester said:

The whole point of FFP was to avoid owners coming into clubs running up huge debts, taking the revenue and then walking away. Also of course to avoid rich owners giving a team an unfair advantage.

If an owner keeps putting money in to cover losses then a club can loose 39 mil over three years. The owner injects cash up to that limit which is used to buy shares in the club which covers the loses. Often the shares are also loan funded too which creates a debt to the owner.

Mels dilema is simple. His nose is pushed against the £39 mil limit. He cant invest any more without likely points deductions. To take the team further in terms of being able to make cash available for players the only option is a NEW investor who has the ability to put in cash which can be regarded as revenue not investment.

A new owner would buy out Mels investment / Debt but this would not change FFP one bit. The only way is for the new investor to be able to justify to the FFP authorities that something like a big sponsorship deal is legit income not investment.

Good example of that is Leicester where the owner also owned massive businesses in the far east and he could legitamately invest 25mil under the revenue stream of sponsorship.

Mel is looking for that type of new owner. It is the only option. Indeed without it the FFP assessment may lead to a Birmingham situation next season.

If Mel funds us right up to the limit, but not beyond, why would we end up in a Birmingham situation?

I thought things might become a little easier FFP wise come the summer, is this not the case?

I only ask because you seem to have a pretty good knowledge of the inner workings of the club on this matter.

[Spanish]

27 minutes ago, reveldevil said:

If Mel funds us right up to the limit, but not beyond, why would we end up in a Birmingham situation?

I thought things might become a little easier FFP wise come the summer, is this not the case?

I only ask because you seem to have a pretty good knowledge of the inner workings of the club on this matter.

I think it has potential to be more difficult FFP wise.  There are few contracts ending for players we overpaid for

[Inglorius]

1 hour ago, Ramleicester said:

The whole point of FFP was to avoid owners coming into clubs running up huge debts, taking the revenue and then walking away. Also of course to avoid rich owners giving a team an unfair advantage.

If an owner keeps putting money in to cover losses then a club can loose 39 mil over three years. The owner injects cash up to that limit which is used to buy shares in the club which covers the loses. Often the shares are also loan funded too which creates a debt to the owner.

Mels dilema is simple. His nose is pushed against the £39 mil limit. He cant invest any more without likely points deductions. To take the team further in terms of being able to make cash available for players the only option is a NEW investor who has the ability to put in cash which can be regarded as revenue not investment.

A new owner would buy out Mels investment / Debt but this would not change FFP one bit. The only way is for the new investor to be able to justify to the FFP authorities that something like a big sponsorship deal is legit income not investment.

Good example of that is Leicester where the owner also owned massive businesses in the far east and he could legitamately invest 25mil under the revenue stream of sponsorship.

Mel is looking for that type of new owner. It is the only option. Indeed without it the FFP assessment may lead to a Birmingham situation next season.

If it's an investment as you state then you're implying Morris wants a return on his money and more then?

[NottsRam77]

2 hours ago, Ramleicester said:

The whole point of FFP was to avoid owners coming into clubs running up huge debts, taking the revenue and then walking away. Also of course to avoid rich owners giving a team an unfair advantage.

If an owner keeps putting money in to cover losses then a club can loose 39 mil over three years. The owner injects cash up to that limit which is used to buy shares in the club which covers the loses. Often the shares are also loan funded too which creates a debt to the owner.

Mels dilema is simple. His nose is pushed against the £39 mil limit. He cant invest any more without likely points deductions. To take the team further in terms of being able to make cash available for players the only option is a NEW investor who has the ability to put in cash which can be regarded as revenue not investment.

A new owner would buy out Mels investment / Debt but this would not change FFP one bit. The only way is for the new investor to be able to justify to the FFP authorities that something like a big sponsorship deal is legit income not investment.

Good example of that is Leicester where the owner also owned massive businesses in the far east and he could legitamately invest 25mil under the revenue stream of sponsorship.

Mel is looking for that type of new owner. It is the only option. Indeed without it the FFP assessment may lead to a Birmingham situation next season.

That seems to make a lot of sense 

and why he’s said from last season onwards he was open to outside investment ... not I’m looking to sell the club 

probably for the exact reasons you’ve perfectly illustrated 

daily fail miss reporting as per 

[Rev]

33 minutes ago, Spanish said:

I think it has potential to be more difficult FFP wise.  There are few contracts ending for players we overpaid for

That was my understanding too, the reducing to zero of players book value against the amount carried forward from last year seems to be a worry.

I'm sure I posted in an earlier thread that we may see Bradley Johnson and others offered an extension based purely around FFP rather than on pitch performance.

It's all guesswork though, isn't it?

It's easy to assume the club have been over generous in their valuations, but maybe it's as likely the values reflected the true worth of those players, and the pain already been taken?

After all, it's not meant to be a means of gaming the system, but an honest valuation of assets held, signed off by the auditors.

 

[Spanish]

1 minute ago, reveldevil said:

That was my understanding too, the reducing to zero of players book value against the amount carried forward from last year seems to be a worry.

I'm sure I posted in an earlier thread that we may see Bradley Johnson and others offered an extension based purely around FFP rather than on pitch performance.

It's all guesswork though, isn't it?

It's easy to assume the club have been over generous in their valuations, but maybe it's as likely the values reflected the true worth of those players, and the pain already been taken?

After all, it's not meant to be a means of gaming the system, but an honest valuation of assets held, signed off by the auditors.

 

Agree we are likely to extend bradders 

[LB_DCFC]

Doesn't exactly sound brilliant...

[Pearl Ram]

Matt Hughes knows duck all.

A Derby County with Frank Lampard still in situ will get MM more dough than most other managers, it will also have more appeal to any prospective buyers. 

[Abu Derby]

It’s time for the club to substantiate these rumours or consign them to the dustbin. This is doing the club no favours and is breeding uncertainty. 

[Rev]

15 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

It’s time for the club to substantiate these rumours or consign them to the dustbin. This is doing the club no favours and is breeding uncertainty. 

If only we had an upcoming public forum in which they could do that?

[MackworthRamIsGod]

I'm sure they were all in Dubai last week?

[Heisenberg]

 

[DcFc Dyycheee]

12 minutes ago, Heisenberg said:

 

The word "could" used a lot in that article.