EFL charge Derby over ffp

[Uptherams]

3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Understand the logic, but what changes would be needed to make into a venue that can host none sporting events (considering that we have already done that)?

Surely any improvements requires would have been factored into the valuation?

Let's not forget the accounts have also been audited.

Hasn't Mel talked in the past about the stadium hosting as many non football events a year as football matches? 25 figure banded about if I remember correctly. Key periods being the summer and also international breaks. But also weeks between home fixtures too. The key being a membrane roof being installed over the pitch. But if you want to attract that many events per year instead of being the typical football stadium hosting 2/3 events in a summer, you require upgrading the facilities of the stadium overall. Such as commercial outlets in front of the main stand and the extended concourse proposal on the East stand.

The region is crying out for a large capacity facility such as this. 

[1967RAMS]

5 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

I understand. But that isn't to say the stadiums valuation has been falsified. It could have been undervalued as an asset. 

My opinion, at £41m, it was. 

It still doesn’t avoid the problem. It’s the company’s responsibility to accurately report the company’s assets each year to the inland revenue. If the company has failed to do this every year by 39 million. The inland revenue will at best recalculate the company’s liabilities and at worst charge the company with falsifying its accounts. 

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, reverendo de duivel said:

It was Mel himself who brought the Inland Revenue into the discussion, during his Jim White interview in the summer.

He basically said he couldn't undervalue or overvalue the stadium sale as HMRC would take a dim view of moving an asset between related parties for less than the value of said asset.

In which case it would be investigated when MM or whatever company the ground is in eventually sell the ground on.

HMRC would only be interested at this point if DCFC had undervalued the ground.

[May Contain Nuts]

27 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Must of lost more than 39 million over 3 years up to 2018. 
 

Valuation of PP is tipping point 
 

 

No, the Tipping Point is a poo quiz show on ITV

[BathRam72]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

Ah well, something to liven up this transfer window I guess ? 

There's a transfer window on?

[Carnero]

10 minutes ago, Bazal77 said:

if the efl have charged us because we have sold an asset for a larger fee than what the efl consider it is worth, then surely they have to look at all sales of assets of all clubs. 
Shouldn’t players be classed as assets? 

Here here!

They can start with Forest flogging their unwanted players at inflated values to another club owned by Marinakis.

Imagine if we could have done that.

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, Uptherams said:

Hasn't Mel talked in the past about the stadium hosting as many non football events a year as football matches? 25 figure banded about if I remember correctly. Key periods being the summer and also international breaks. But also weeks between home fixtures too. The key being a membrane roof being installed over the pitch. But if you want to attract that many events per year instead of being the typical football stadium hosting 2/3 events in a summer, you require upgrading the facilities of the stadium overall. Such as commercial outlets in front of the main stand and the extended concourse proposal on the East stand.

The region is crying out for a large capacity facility such as this. 

Yes but I cant see that any proposed developments would have been included in the current valuation of the ground.

 

[Bubbles]

Well, i’m not suprised to say the least.

Yeah maybe it’s Mel’s fault but the reason he’s pumped so much money into the club is because the majority of our fanbase want a shortcut to success, they want promotion instantly and like we’ve seen this season, they get impatient.

He tried to please our fans and try and buy promotion and ultimately he failed.

Now he’s doing what he should do, taking it steady, we get ducked in the ******** by the EFL.

What a ducking time to be alive.

[G STAR RAM]

5 minutes ago, GenBr said:

I dont disagree with you. GSE were also incompetent in my eyes.

Its a fine balance to strike, but the likes of Shef Utd have shown you dont have to go bust to do it. (Or at least break the arbritrary limit set by the EFL)

I hate the FFP rules with a passion, but they werent a surprise for us. They have been in place for a long time now. 

And as far as I am aware we have not broken any rules.

My guess is something has happened where the rule in place is inadequate.

If not, then why has this charge only come now 13 months after the EFL had the figures?

[Sith Happens]

I like to be positive but can't see this ending with anything but a points deduction. 

The efl must be confident to change us. I really don't see us winning this. 

I think mel should release a statement immediately to confirm what the clubs plans are around this.

Not happy,  we have been always assured we are within ffp.

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Here here!

They can start with Forest flogging their unwanted players at inflated values to another club owned by Marinakis.

Imagine if we could have done that.

And Boro selling their tax losses to a related company 

[cannable]

2 minutes ago, Squid said:

Well, i’m not suprised to say the least.

Yeah maybe it’s Mel’s fault but the reason he’s pumped so much money into the club is because the majority of our fanbase want a shortcut to success, they want promotion instantly and like we’ve seen this season, they get impatient.

He tried to please our fans and try and buy promotion and ultimately he failed.

Now he’s doing what he should do, taking it steady, we get ducked in the ******** by the EFL.

What a ducking time to be alive.

But this would still be his fault? 

Don't appease the fans, the fans are ducking idiots.

[Uptherams]

3 minutes ago, 1967RAMS said:

It still doesn’t avoid the problem. It’s the company’s responsibility to accurately report the company’s assets each year to the inland revenue. If the company has failed to do this every year by 39 million. The inland revenue will at best recalculate the company’s liabilities and at worst charge the company with falsifying its accounts. 

I agree. But who thought the stadium had the potential to be upgraded in such a way that it could host 25 non football events per year? The valuation changes significantly. That isn't falsifying accounts or incompetence. It's very business savvy. Looking at an asset and seeing how that asset could be utilised more or differently and thus increasing the value of that asset. 

[ramit]

What a tempus horribilis

What's next, a giant sinkhole swallowing up Pride Park?

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, cannable said:

But this would still be his fault? 

Don't appease the fans, the fans are ducking idiots.

Vicious circle though, dont keep the fans happy and numbers drop, meaning more money needs pumping into the club...

[bimmerman]

Always one to look on the bright side

If Derby go down, and Exeter go up as they're 2nd in league 2,ill easily make 1 game next year ???

[G STAR RAM]

9 minutes ago, 1967RAMS said:

It still doesn’t avoid the problem. It’s the company’s responsibility to accurately report the company’s assets each year to the inland revenue. If the company has failed to do this every year by 39 million. The inland revenue will at best recalculate the company’s liabilities and at worst charge the company with falsifying its accounts. 

Without going into detail, what you are saying is miles wide of the mark and completely incorrect.

[Bubbles]

3 minutes ago, cannable said:

But this would still be his fault? 

Don't appease the fans, the fans are ducking idiots.

The fans bring in the money, he had to spend to keep everyone satisfied and in the end its bit him where the sun don’t shine.

[Uptherams]

6 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yes but I cant see that any proposed developments would have been included in the current valuation of the ground.

 

Why not? This is the same period that the club and people like Mel were talking about the stadiums infrastructure and non footballing events. Strikes me as the only legitimate reason the value of the stadium would essentially double. 

[GenBr]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

And as far as I am aware we have not broken any rules.

My guess is something has happened where the rule in place is inadequate.

If not, then why has this charge only come now 13 months after the EFL had the figures?

If it is the sale stadium that is under question here it did used to be against the rules to sell assets such as the stadium and use them in your FFP calculations. The rules were subsequently changed - (2016 if I remember correctly) and removed this portion of the rules - leaving everyone clear to go ahead and sell their stadiums to help with FFP.

So there is nothing to stop you selling your stadium - the only thing it could possibly be is the valuation. I can't really see how they can dispute this either though unless something has occurred we aren't privy too currently. On the outside if there is no new information revealed I can't see how it would be possible for us to lose any kind of court case in this situation.