Jump to content

Abu Derby County


tinman

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

Assuming that this isn't just complete made up twaddle, something looks really odd.

It would be illogical for us to make ourselves worse off by giving Carson away - I can't believe that Man City would expect us to. We've also, on the face of things, very little reason to refuse a transfer if they just agreed to pay the £500k as a transfer fee rather than a loan fee. Therefore there must be something else in the finances preventing it. 

He might have a large RV, but his initial transfer fee was low, so I doubt that. My guess is that he has a huge loyalty bonus which he'll get now if we sell him, but in June if we don't - these bonuses are usually cancelled if the player submits a written transfer request. 

It does seem to that this is easily sortable by Man City and Carson though.

attachment.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 10.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
29 minutes ago, GenBr said:

MSD has loans with a few clubs - theyve taken full advantage of the pandemic. Unless we've taken another loan they only get the stadium if we default at the moment don't they?

No they have security over everything - all MM’s football assets. But I still think it’s unthinkable that it would be a default scenario 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Gotta laugh at Citeh. Cry me a river Pep!

Without doubt the most entitled football club on the planet ?

Can't stand the moron , the way he defended mendy after he broke lockdown rules and had a party etc is disgusting, constantly moaning about injuries and playing too many games yet he fields a full strength side against weak opposition in the cup , proper toss pot 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

They have charges against the stadium (including the car park, Moor Farm, Club DCFC, the club itself (where the golden share lives, ie the EFL franchise)and the academy. They have also included the all the shell and holding companies.

Paid it off I thought pretty quick after taking it out 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kevinhectoring said:

No they have security over everything - all MM’s football assets. But I still think it’s unthinkable that it would be a default scenario 

To be honest at this point Dell getting everything might be better than the Sheikh getting everything. Do we know the loan amounts? Just wondering if they'd be able to recoup their losses by selling assets if they did come into possession of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

But if we agreed now to transfer surely City could pay the fee immediately? 

Of course they could, but they'd rather try and bully us and then moan when it doesn't pan out. They're so up their own arse that they don't even grasp how classless this makes them look. Them awash with cash, us really not, but still whining over £500k. Gimme a break! ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Why? The £500k is to cover his wages. They want to 'buy' Carson for £0 so no transfer of money

What do you mean when you say they want to buy him for £0? The article says they are struggling to even open negotiations with Derby rather than they want him for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Why? The £500k is to cover his wages. They want to 'buy' Carson for £0 so no transfer of money

I know I'm being a bit thick here but, why would we sell him and why would City think they could buy him for £0 if he is still under contract with us which I assume he must be otherwise, as a free agent, couldn't he just join them and city wouldn't be paying us a loan fee?

Or if the fee does only cover his wages and his contract is up in the summer then I guess it's a cashflow issue.

What am I missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I know I'm being a bit thick here but, why would we sell him and why would City think they could buy him for £0 if he is still under contract with us which I assume he must be otherwise, as a free agent, couldn't he just join them and city wouldn't be paying us a loan fee?

Or if the fee does only cover his wages and his contract is up in the summer then I guess it's a cashflow issue.

What am I missing?

Perhaps it’s just a load of old tosh like that paper always churns out 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds to me like the £500k is to cover any loan fee plus the wages for the next 6 months.

Sounds like they're asking us to sell him for the loan fee value (say £60k) and save the rest on the liability of the wages from the next 6 months.

I think our issue is basically we need the £500k lump sum now to cover other things, and we will kick the can down the road and deal with the wages we need to pay him and potentially lack of money on a month to month basis.

I imagine if Man City had paid his wages monthly rather than in a lump sum at certain intervals we probably would have accepted it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I know I'm being a bit thick here but, why would we sell him and why would City think they could buy him for £0 if he is still under contract with us which I assume he must be otherwise, as a free agent, couldn't he just join them and city wouldn't be paying us a loan fee?

Or if the fee does only cover his wages and his contract is up in the summer then I guess it's a cashflow issue.

What am I missing?

Actually, I think I've finally understood what the article means. I remember when the loan initially happened we needed to get Carson's wages off he books for FFP reasons. It appears that he's on about £1m per year, so Man City gave us a loan fee £500k upfront to cover his wages for six months, with the agreement that if all happy it would renew after every six months until his contract ends. We would still pay his wages. That way our cashflow would be eased in the summer and our FFP situation improved overall.

So now Man City are saying that if we agree to a free transfer, they will be paying his wages, so we'll be £500k better off by June anyway so we shouldn't need a transfer fee. Our problem will be that we need £500k more now than we do a £19k per week reduction in our wage bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...