Tribunal Update

[Sparkle]

34 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Reviewing the P&S losses and it's concerning how close to the limit we will be for 2020 and 2021.

Confirmed P&S profit/losses are:

• 2018 = £7.207m
• 2019 = -£31.517m

This means our maximum allowable loss for 2020 is £14.69m.

The worrying part is the amortisation. When I saw the 2019 losses, I assumed this was a result of considerable amortisation charges. This was not the case. Confirmed amortisation in 2018 was £6.5m, 2019 was £4.6m and (unless it was a typo) 2020 was £25.1m as of April 2019.

Using the known 2018 and 2019 figures, I'm struggling to see how we've met 2020 limits. An increase in the amortisation charge of over £20m will only be partially offset by a reduction in wages (a rough stab in the dark of £13m from 17/18). Profit on disposal isn't going to be much - Thomas, Delap and Lampard may fall inside 19/20 - possibly about £7.5m combined. These estimates result in a P&S loss of about £36.6m in 19/20, resulting in a 3 year loss of over £60m. I must be missing something!

Hasn’t the three year period been changed to a four year period now due to covid?

[ck-]

6 hours ago, RamNut said:

Having lost every single legal argument that the EFL were acting inappropriately, vexatiously, or ultra fires, I think we would be well advised, to drop the idea of sueing them. 

I agree. That was one of the things I took away - the EFL were within their rights, and arguably were correctly discharging their responsibilities to other clubs by doing so. 
 

I also think it’s to our benefit ultimately. No-one (I’m talking to you Gibson) can argue that we’re hiding behind technicalities. We were cleared of the charges. 

[Ghost of Clough]

43 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Hasn’t the three year period been changed to a four year period now due to covid?

Maybe. That may be what I'm missing, but the projected accounts wouldn't have factored in the change to 4 years. I only see the one claim from a Sheffield paper? Would that come in to play for the 2020 period or 2021? They mention the average of 2 seasons. Would that be the two most recent?

[Ramos]

Has anyone seen that there’s a banner currently being flown over pride park? can’t read what it says - not even sure if it’s anything to do with DCFC. Couple of people have spotted it and put it on twitter but no one has made out what it says yet. 

[ThePrisoner]

4 minutes ago, Ramos said:

Has anyone seen that there’s a banner currently being flown over pride park? can’t read what it says - not even sure if it’s anything to do with DCFC. Couple of people have spotted it and put it on twitter but no one has made out what it says yet. 

It’s just flown over Hilton. Can’t make it out though. 

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

I guess we either need to sell or get promoted?

Given that the season has already finished I'm going to hazard a guess that we will find that very hard!

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The residual value is set to £0 at the end of a player's contract. An ERV is set either at the start of the final year, or when the club expects to sell the player. With Johnson and Butterfield, it's likely we expected promotion within 2 seasons therefore expecting to sell the pair at the end of season 2. So an ERV close to the original fee would have been set. This ERV would have been adjusted every 6 months so towards the end of 16/17, with little chance of promotion, the ERV moved to the start of their final years. The contract extension in the final year resulted in the amortisation being evenly split between the final 2 years.

This graph may help show what I'm trying to say:

It says in the document that the ERV is changed to a residual value of £0 when a player enters the final year of their contract and the difference amortised over the year.

Unless the contracts were extended prior to the player entering the final year surely we were only shifting thousands of pounds into the next year by extending player contracts AFTER they had already entered the final year of the contract?

If not, I cannot see how we were applying the policy correctly.

[BriggRam]

4 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

 

Appears to me that had the EFL actually spoken to our professional advisers to get an understanding of the transactions the whole process would have been avoided.

 

in a sick perverse way i'm glad we did go through the whole process.........i think that had the EFL thrown it out straight away the clarity that the independent report shows wouldn't be there, and we would be getting tarnished as "cheats" alot worse than we are now....tho to be fair  its only Bamfords that haven't actually took the time to look at the facts that are gobbing off

[ThePrisoner]

20 minutes ago, Ramos said:

Has anyone seen that there’s a banner currently being flown over pride park? can’t read what it says - not even sure if it’s anything to do with DCFC. Couple of people have spotted it and put it on twitter but no one has made out what it says yet. 

Stuart Andrews RIP or something or other. Nothing to do with us!

[Ghost of Clough]

11 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

It says in the document that the ERV is changed to a residual value of £0 when a player enters the final year of their contract and the difference amortised over the year.

Unless the contracts were extended prior to the player entering the final year surely we were only shifting thousands of pounds into the next year by extending player contracts AFTER they had already entered the final year of the contract?

If not, I cannot see how we were applying the policy correctly.

Which section is that stated?

Pg 25, section 54.

I interpret that as assigning an ERV no later than the start of the final season, with the final amount being amortised in that final season. Any contract extensions would split the remaining amount over the new remaining period, applying a new ERV if relevant.

[BriggRam]

1 hour ago, MikeS said:

Even more laughable was Boro's ludicruous claim that the stadium was worth around £22 million. Both the EFL and especially Boro should pay the cost of the whole wasted exercise

ours and Boro's stadium are identical so Gobbo maybe had had the Riverside  valued at 22 million just before we got PP valued at 80 million, what the throbber failed to realise is that the Riverside is in ducking Middlesbrough

[Ghost of Clough]

2 minutes ago, BriggRam said:

ours and Boro's stadium are identical so Gobbo maybe had had the Riverside  valued at 22 million just before we got PP valued at 80 million, what the throbber failed to realise is that the Riverside is in ducking Middlesbrough

Older, based in Middlesbrough, and likely vastly inferior facilities.

[RadioactiveWaste]

Just now, Ghost of Clough said:

Older, based in Middlesbrough, and likely vastly inferior facilities.

I went to boro away in about 2009, for saying it's a very similar design, I was surprised how poo it was. 

Back in the Jordan Stewart at left back and Gregg mills getting minutes days....

[Reggie Greenwood]

8 minutes ago, BriggRam said:

ours and Boro's stadium are identical so Gobbo maybe had had the Riverside  valued at 22 million just before we got PP valued at 80 million, what the throbber failed to realise is that the Riverside is in ducking Middlesbrough

Dont think all the corners are filled in at Boro and interior is inferior to PP 

[ThePrisoner]

7 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Older, based in Middlesbrough, and likely vastly inferior facilities.

The Greggs built into the corner of ours adds £60m to the value alone.

[Ellafella]

4 hours ago, RamNut said:

Correct

The appointment of mr messenger is where it all went wrong for the EFL. They could have gone to multiple valuers to see what sort of answers they got, but that’s with the benefit of hindsight. Having appointed a professional valuer who was clearly outspoken in stating his opinion that PP was significantly over-valued, they responded as they did and this whole sorry chain of events was set in motion. Unfortunately they hired a valuer who misrepresented his own experience and abilities. The IDC unpicked the whole process and found significant fault with his methodology. Result - Derby win.

Absolutely. In plain terms Mr Messenger comes across as what might be described on the Clapham Omnibus as a "chancer" and an individual who clearly undervalued Pride Park whilst simultaneously over-valuing his own significance in the world of expert witnesses. He appeared not to understand the finer points of "professionalism" and his battle ship was totally sunk when his calculations were scrutinised. He found it difficult to use the same figures consistently once he'd turned a page on his report and didn't seem to understand the difference between "capacity" of a stadium and average attendance. Nor, does it seem, as he ever attended a football match in a stadium. I strongly suspect that the EFL would have been better served had they commissioned a bona fide Rams supporter who would've given them far better value and more objective evidence about Pride Park for the 5-figure fee than Mr Messenger. There is so much egg on the EFL's face right now you could make a considerable sized omelette and feed every one of Mr Steven Gibson's supporters at "MFC" for several match days. 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

36 minutes ago, Ellafella said:

Absolutely. In plain terms Mr Messenger comes across as what might be described on the Clapham Omnibus as a "chancer" and an individual who clearly undervalued Pride Park whilst simultaneously over-valuing his own significance in the world of expert witnesses. He appeared not to understand the finer points of "professionalism" and his battle ship was totally sunk when his calculations were scrutinised. He found it difficult to use the same figures consistently once he'd turned a page on his report and didn't seem to understand the difference between "capacity" of a stadium and average attendance. Nor, does it seem, as he ever attended a football match in a stadium. I strongly suspect that the EFL would have been better served had they commissioned a bona fide Rams supporter who would've given them far better value and more objective evidence about Pride Park for the 5-figure fee than Mr Messenger. There is so much egg on the EFL's face right now you could make a considerable sized omelette and feed every one of Mr Steven Gibson's supporters at "MFC" for several match days. 

You'd only heed half a dozen eggs for that in fairness.

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Which section is that stated?

Pg 25, section 54.

I interpret that as assigning an ERV no later than the start of the final season, with the final amount being amortised in that final season. Any contract extensions would split the remaining amount over the new remaining period, applying a new ERV if relevant.

Point number 3?

If the contract extension had not been granted before entering the final year then the figure would be amortised from the ERV down to £0 on a straight line basis.

If a contract extension was granted 2 months before the contract was due to expire that would make little difference unless the ERV was ridiculously high before entering the final year of the contract?

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I went to boro away in about 2009, for saying it's a very similar design, I was surprised how poo it was. 

Back in the Jordan Stewart at left back and Gregg mills getting minutes days....

Same for Stoke and Southampton. I'm struggling to remember a stadium in the Championship with better facilities. Mr Plopodoplous on the Bristol forum thinks it's a "laugh" to consider Derby's facilities to be better than theirs ?‍♂️ Of course Mr Messenger considers our stadium to be "bog standard" so you have to feel sorry for almost every club in the country, bar a handful in the Prem, who have stadium which must be described as worse than bog standard.

[Ghost of Clough]

5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Point number 3?

If the contract extension had not been granted before entering the final year then the figure would be amortised from the ERV down to £0 on a straight line basis.

If a contract extension was granted 2 months before the contract was due to expire that would make little difference unless the ERV was ridiculously high before entering the final year of the contract?

Isn't it calculated every 6 months?
Contract extension in the first 6 months = full year of amortisation now split over new contract length
Contract extension in final 6 months = half year of amortisation split over new contract length