Tribunal Update

[dcfcreece1601]

So sheff wed got charged in November and only punished now , so with us getting charged last January it would be a few months away before we hear anything,  what an absolute load of beef lasagna

[MackworthRamIsGod]

3 minutes ago, dcfcreece1601 said:

So sheff wed got charged in November and only punished now , so with us getting charged last January it would be a few months away before we hear anything,  what an absolute load of beef lasagna

This is actually a good point.

The EFL could string it out until later into next season and apply their points deduction based on where we are.

[QuitYourJibbaJivin]

4 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

This is actually a good point.

The EFL could string it out until later into next season and apply their points deduction based on where we are.

I doubt that’s the case now to be honest seeing as the hearing has already taken place. We’re just waiting to hear the verdict, it’s out of the EFL’s hands now.

[DCFC1388]

4 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

This is actually a good point.

The EFL could string it out until later into next season and apply their points deduction based on where we are.

Its the independant panel we're waiting on, not the EFL

Also, wasnt our hearing a week or so after Sheff Weds?

[Gritty]

Putting the charge to one side, what is the right approach?

1. Does it make sense to apply an accounting model that requires yearly revaluations of players, when there is no way of testing those valuations? If so, why are we the only club of all 92 to do this?

I don't think it does make sense as previous accounts suggest we had players valued well in excess of zero who ended up leaving on a free that we had to write down significantly, indicating we got our values wrong. 

2. Is it a comfortable position to be in for the club to not own its ground? Charlton are in a complete mess now because the club was sold but owner kept ground.  But then again, it's a common model elsewhere so I think this more debatable.

Overall, I think it's bad as we lose control of rental rate should Mel ever need to cash in on ground. It's not a given that if club is sold the stadium is acquired too.

I realise that some people strongly disagree with some of my posts on these issues.  I'm not trying to troll. I just genuinely feel that our club has not acted correctly in these areas and don't agree with an 'ends justifies means' or 'all is fair in love and war' approach.

I don't think it is disloyal to question our club's actions. These are matters on which reasonable people can simply disagree I think. 

[Rev]

13 minutes ago, Gritty said:

Is it a comfortable position to be in for the club to not own its ground? Charlton are in a complete mess now because the club was sold but owner kept ground.  But then again, it's a common model elsewhere so I think this more debatable.

Overall, I think it's bad as we lose control of rental rate risk should Mel ever need to cash in on ground. It's not a given that if club is sold the stadium is acquired too.

I agree.

However I trust Mel to act in the best interests of Derby County first, and Mel Morris second.

I don't think he's given a reason to think otherwise during his tenure, but the path to hell is paved with good intentions, so I've heard.

The concern would be if he ever reaches the limit of what he could invest just to cover the day to day running, and needs an exit strategy.

Any buyer right now would be looking at a club worth barely more than what he paid for it, never mind invested, particularly in these Covid-19 circumstances, yet stripped of its major asset, so what would our value be, and howcould Mel extract his investment so far?

I don't see a way.

 

[QuitYourJibbaJivin]

29 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

I agree.

However I trust Mel to act in the best interests of Derby County first, and Mel Morris second.

I don't think he's given a reason to think otherwise during his tenure, but the path to hell is paved with good intentions, so I've heard.

The concern would be if he ever reaches the limit of what he could invest just to cover the day to day running, and needs an exit strategy.

Any buyer right now would be looking at a club worth barely more than what he paid for it, never mind invested, particularly in these Covid-19 circumstances, yet stripped of its major asset, so what would our value be, and howcould Mel extract his investment so far?

I don't see a way.

 

I’ve thought about this myself regarding  the ground when ever we have new owners. I guess there’s no real issue in Mel selling the ground for however much he wanted if it was to a third party? He could sell the club for £50M and the ground for a pound. The main issue we’re currently having with the ground sale is he’s sold something to himself which at first glance looks a bit suspect.

[Tamworthram]

43 minutes ago, Gritty said:

Putting the charge to one side, what is the right approach?

1. Does it make sense to apply an accounting model that requires yearly revaluations of players, when there is no way of testing those valuations? If so, why are we the only club of all 92 to do this?

I don't think it does make sense as previous accounts suggest we had players valued well in excess of zero who ended up leaving on a free that we had to write down significantly, indicating we got our values wrong. 

2. Is it a comfortable position to be in for the club to not own its ground? Charlton are in a complete mess now because the club was sold but owner kept ground.  But then again, it's a common model elsewhere so I think this more debatable.

Overall, I think it's bad as we lose control of rental rate should Mel ever need to cash in on ground. It's not a given that if club is sold the stadium is acquired too.

I realise that some people strongly disagree with some of my posts on these issues.  I'm not trying to troll. I just genuinely feel that our club has not acted correctly in these areas and don't agree with an 'ends justifies means' or 'all is fair in love and war' approach.

I don't think it is disloyal to question our club's actions. These are matters on which reasonable people can simply disagree I think. 

With regard to valuing players, I think this is a tough one as, unlike most other assets, there value could go up so, the normal method for depreciation may not necessarily be that valid. However, I think the EFL should enforce a consistent policy that all clubs have to follow. 

Not owning our own ground can't be an ideal situation but, the sale seems to have been the only way to avoid FFP problems. So, it may be a common model but in our case (in many others I suspect) not chosen because it was considered a desirable one.

[Will Hughes Hair]

29 minutes ago, Gritty said:

Putting the charge to one side, what is the right approach?

1. Does it make sense to apply an accounting model that requires yearly revaluations of players, when there is no way of testing those valuations? If so, why are we the only club of all 92 to do this?

I don't think it does make sense as previous accounts suggest we had players valued well in excess of zero who ended up leaving on a free that we had to write down significantly, indicating we got our values wrong. 

2. Is it a comfortable position to be in for the club to not own its ground? Charlton are in a complete mess now because the club was sold but owner kept ground.  But then again, it's a common model elsewhere so I think this more debatable.

Overall, I think it's bad as we lose control of rental rate should Mel ever need to cash in on ground. It's not a given that if club is sold the stadium is acquired too.

I realise that some people strongly disagree with some of my posts on these issues.  I'm not trying to troll. I just genuinely feel that our club has not acted correctly in these areas and don't agree with an 'ends justifies means' or 'all is fair in love and war' approach.

I don't think it is disloyal to question our club's actions. These are matters on which reasonable people can simply disagree I think. 

I'm fully aware that I'm a happy clapper but even so I don't think there's anything in your post that could ever qualify as disloyal.  Asking legitimate questions is to be encouraged.

For me, Mel has tried (just like every other Championship club chairman has) to gain whatever legitimate business advantage he can for his club.  Nothing more nothing less.

Without full access to the facts, I would tend to agree that we may have pushed the envelope on amortisation but I'm not convinced we broke the rules here either.

The problem I have with some posters (and I'm not referencing you specifically because you may not have done this) is that without any hard evidence they seem to want to tar and feather Mel.  For screwing us over.  When in reality he has sunk over a 100 million of his own cash into the club.  That sort of commitment buys him a fair bit of leeway in my book, particularly as (at this point) he and the club haven't been proven to do any wrong.

[Comrade 86]

Why do so many sports have such utterly loathsome governing bodies? And while the EFL play judge, jury and executioner, where's the accountability in regards to their own performance? Are these stuffed-shirted cretins even subject to any kind of performance review?

Year after year these ricks poo the bed yet never once are they themselves sanctioned, as individuals or as a group. No admission of guilt, no apology, just arrogant AF. As an organisation they are not remotely fit for purpose and yet their snouts remain firmly rooted in the trough while member clubs desperately try and keep themselves afloat. It's an absolute disgrace.

Sack the ducking lot of them and either start again or preferably create an entirely new body whose primary directive is to raise the profile of the hardest fought league in world football.  

Cap agent's fees, protect your member clubs, negotiate a deal that reflects the value of the product, establish and enforce a code of ethics whereby Gibson and his ilk don't get to slander and libel fellow league menbers and most importantly, work openly and work transparently against agreed SLA's and KPI's making damn sure you meet them. In short, do your ducking jobs you useless, self-serving bunch of inadequate melts. Ducking risible.

[Ramslad1992]

14 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Why do so many sports have such utterly loathsome governing bodies? And while the EFL play judge, jury and executioner, where's the accountability in regards to their own performance? Are these stuffed-shirted cretins even subject to any kind of performance review?

Year after year these ricks poo the bed yet never once are they themselves sanctioned, as individuals or as a group. No admission of guilt, no apology, just arrogant AF. As an organisation they are not remotely fit for purpose and yet their snouts remain firmly rooted in the trough while member clubs desperately try and keep themselves afloat. It's an absolute disgrace.

Sack the ducking lot of them and either start again or preferably create an entirely new body whose primary directive is to raise the profile of the hardest fought league in world football.  

Cap agent's fees, protect your member clubs, negotiate a deal that reflects the value of the product, establish and enforce a code of ethics whereby Gibson and his ilk don't get to slander and libel fellow league menbers and most importantly, work openly and work transparently against agreed SLA's and KPI's making damn sure you meet them. In short, do your ducking jobs you useless, self-serving bunch of inadequate melts. Ducking risible.

Can always count on your rants to make me chuckle ? speaking perfect sense yet again though ??

[Comrade 86]

9 minutes ago, Ramslad1992 said:

Can always count on your rants to make me chuckle ? speaking perfect sense yet again though ??

Thank you kind sir. I should probably thank the EFL anyway. My once weekly rant over their ineptitude is way cheaper than a therapist.

[ilkleyram]

1 hour ago, QuitYourJibbaJivin said:

I doubt that’s the case now to be honest seeing as the hearing has already taken place. We’re just waiting to hear the verdict, it’s out of the EFL’s hands now.

Serious question - has anyone seen an official statement from the club or the EFL that the hearing has actually taken place? Or finished?

[SamUltraRam]

Regarding FFP & the Covid-19 crisis, the EFL have had time to deliver a set of financial directives - urgently for the short term but also for the medium term.

We're less than a month from the start of the new season and lets be honest, most non parachute supported clubs are going to fail this years FFP limits.

But unless i've missed something, the EFL haven't muttered a word about it and it's 5 months since the lockdown started.

Clubs need to know what they can & cannot spend on transfers/loans/contracts to avoid any punitive EFL FFP punishments

Sort it out EFL !!

 

[Ramslad1992]

24 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Thank you kind sir. I should probably thank the EFL anyway. My once weekly rant over their ineptitude is way cheaper than a therapist.

Once weekly?! ?

[Gritty]

1 hour ago, Will Hughes Hair said:

I'm fully aware that I'm a happy clapper but even so I don't think there's anything in your post that could ever qualify as disloyal.  Asking legitimate questions is to be encouraged.

For me, Mel has tried (just like every other Championship club chairman has) to gain whatever legitimate business advantage he can for his club.  Nothing more nothing less.

Without full access to the facts, I would tend to agree that we may have pushed the envelope on amortisation but I'm not convinced we broke the rules here either.

The problem I have with some posters (and I'm not referencing you specifically because you may not have done this) is that without any hard evidence they seem to want to tar and feather Mel.  For screwing us over.  When in reality he has sunk over a 100 million of his own cash into the club.  That sort of commitment buys him a fair bit of leeway in my book, particularly as (at this point) he and the club haven't been proven to do any wrong.

I agree Mel's intentions are good (ie. He wants success for Derby). And agree he has donated large sums of his personal wealth to that end which is admirable. 

I think his investment in academy is far sighted and has been brilliant. 

I think some of his actions, while well intentioned, have been mistakes (splurging money on loads of players that we could only afford under ffp if we adopted highly unusual accounting techniques plus selling stadium; some weird managerial changes with very different styles leaving us with a bloated squad with expensive players not suited to some managers).

It may be he's learnt from these mistakes in which case that's great.  We all make mistakes and that's how you learn. 

[Crazy]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

With regard to valuing players, I think this is a tough one as, unlike most other assets, there value could go up so, the normal method for depreciation may not necessarily be that valid. However, I think the EFL should enforce a consistent policy that all clubs have to follow. 

Not owning our own ground can't be an ideal situation but, the sale seems to have been the only way to avoid FFP problems. So, it may be a common model but in our case (in many others I suspect) not chosen because it was considered a desirable one.

I'm not sure our method of accounting player values is perfect (in particular giving a 1 month extension to push a players value loss into the next year is ridiculous). But linear depreciation (which I believe is the most common) also isn't right. 

Imagine a player was bought 2 years ago for £4m on a 4 year contract. And another player has just been signed for £4m on a 2 year contact. Both are players of the same value, both with the same remaining contract, so they should have the same value on the books, not one half the other. 

EFL should commission some statisticians to calculate how much of a players value diminishes as their contact nears the end, and then all teams should use that. But we know that's never going to happen. 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

As far as I can see the EFL board consists of 3 championship divisional directors 2 from league 1 and 1 from league 2. Add to these the chairman Rick Parry plus two non football people. 

Our own Stephen Pearce is one of the championship divisional directors so you would think he has access to the timetable of the procedure but maybe not. 

[Ramarena]

This vindicative and utterly incompetent organisation needs to terminated with immediate effect!

 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

 

Forest fans seem convinced we're getting a 15 point ban . At first I assumed it was a load of balls.  Now i've heard it from so many of them, I fear the red dogs top lads have infiltrated the upper echelons of the EFL and it's a conspiracy.  The ineptitude gives it further credence.  If you spot this lot coming out of the EFL Blandford Street offices start sweating