May Contain Nuts Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 14 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said: You mean instead of thinking that it could be a sign that the takeover is dead? More just thinking that it marked anything significant in terms of the progress of the deal either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24Charlie Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 I’ve tried to write a coherent post to encapsulate the recent goings and the possibilities going forward and I’ve given up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Mick L White Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 36 minutes ago, Needlesh said: I'd sooner have penury under Mel having turned the cash taps off than chance our fate with these pathetic timewasters. If they wanted the club, had the means to buy it, and the intention to take it forward, they would have done by early January. If any of those three elements are lacking, they'll do unspeakable harm if they do blag their way into ownership. By the way...I've seen a few having a go at Mel. Those people have it all wrong. Tragically wrong. Mel is up there with LP as the best owner we've had in my lifetime. Just needed a dash of luck, is all. Mel had been solid with his financial support and he is a fan - his big error was in trusting Sam Rush with the check book. Had he brought in the Brentford CEO instead of Sam Rush we would have been promoted by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 1 minute ago, Mr. Mick L White said: Mel had been solid with his financial support and he is a fan - his big error was in trusting Sam Rush with the check book. Had he brought in the Brentford CEO instead of Sam Rush we would have been promoted by now. He didn't bring Sam Rush in, he was already here when Mel took over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mihangel Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 18 minutes ago, 24Charlie said: I’ve tried to write a coherent post to encapsulate the recent goings and the possibilities going forward and I’ve given up. It's rather a shame that others have not come to the same conclusion.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
europia Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 1 hour ago, Pearl Ram said: Would that be such a bad thing though ? They strike me as fantasists, “Oh wouldn’t it be a hoot to own a football club” ? Not having the first clue how to close a deal, never mind take the club forward. While I regret it appears Mel has been mucked about, I don’t regret these BSers have not got their mitts on our club. "No deal better than a bad deal".....now where have I heard that before ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, europia said: "No deal better than a bad deal".....now where have I heard that before ?? Dr Sheikh’s ram stew may be oven ready ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Ram Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 Just now, europia said: "No deal better than a bad deal".....now where have I heard that before ?? I really couldn’t say but something’s telling me I should know. Still think we’d be better off without them at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 45 minutes ago, 24Charlie said: I’ve tried to write a coherent post to encapsulate the recent goings and the possibilities going forward and I’ve given up. Incoherence hasn't stopped some posters from giving their opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
europia Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, Pearl Ram said: I really couldn’t say but something’s telling me I should know. Still think we’d be better off without them at this time. Most definitely, the Fake Sheikh has lost so much credibility, there's surely no cobbled up deal that would redeem him. OK, Mr Morris is desperately looking for a way out, and I guess the offer on the table is the only show in town. Hence the reason for hanging on. Even if it's hanging on for the inevitable 'it's officially off' communication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topram Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 The main thing now too move forward is to either set a date within the next week or move on, the club needs clarity I think even Mel is probably in the dark as too where the money is, the last thing we need is the players not being paid on Friday because the money was promised again and never came, the EFL may say the embargo is staying until you prove you can pay them on Friday... the club just needs to have a forward direction and not anymore if buts or when because it’s holding us back big big time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plymouthram Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 They are all getting paid this Wednesday, could be the day of reckoning? Annoucement by club? 1. Takeover is happening. 2. Take over is not happening. 3. We are bringing in 3/4 players before 11a.m. on Monday with the money we have from sold players. 4. We are calling in the Administration 5.Any thoughts bloggers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Sagan Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 On 24/01/2021 at 21:44, europia said: To my understanding (please correct me if I am wrong), when Mr Morris took over at DCFC, the club owned it's own ground (and primary asset). I believe this is no longer the case. That's probably a very big disappointment to a lot of people. 11 hours ago, Tyler Durden said: I think the unease about this transaction was two fold, firstly why were we compelled to do this in the first place and secondly the ground now is owned by a totally separate entity than the club - not sure why you think one could be sold without the other as it wouldn't be totally inconceivable that the stadium owner could charge ground rent etc to the new club owners as a form of lease. The only reason the ground and the club are separate are because of the daft, totally artificial FFP rules. Without them, Mel could have simply put the money in. But because of them, he had to construct an artificial way around to give money to the club. If anything shows the whole FFP concept should be done away with, then this is it. When the rules that were claimed would help clubs, turn out to hinder and actually damage them, those rules don't seem fit for purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 7 minutes ago, Topram said: the club just needs to have a forward direction and not anymore if buts or when because it’s holding us back big big time! Things looking up on the pitch for sure. And from what he says, WR will be content with his transfers/loans. So IS IT holding us up big time? If MM reckons the best option just now is to wait to see if BZG finally ponies up the lolly, fine by me. I’m sure he’ll call time on it when it makes sense to do that and it’s quite possible others are already involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derby8 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 4 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said: The only reason the ground and the club are separate are because of the daft, totally artificial FFP rules. Without them, Mel could have simply put the money in. But because of them, he had to construct an artificial way around to give money to the club. If anything shows the whole FFP concept should be done away with, then this is it. When the rules that were claimed would help clubs, turn out to hinder and actually damage them, those rules don't seem fit for purpose. Totally agree. ffp as constructed a nonsense. Remember when Jack Walker was pumping money into Blackburn the other clubs supported it because he was actually pumping money into the game generally, through player transfer fees he paid. There is now I believe a salary cap as well as the ?£13m pa deficit allowed on a 3 year rolling basis, as tweaked for covid. Needs a complete overhaul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derby8 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 6 minutes ago, derby8 said: Totally agree. ffp as constructed a nonsense. Remember when Jack Walker was pumping money into Blackburn the other clubs supported it because he was actually pumping money into the game generally, through player transfer fees he paid. There is now I believe a salary cap as well as the ?£13m pa deficit allowed on a 3 year rolling basis, as tweaked for covid. Needs a complete overhaul. ps, the covid related financial problems could lead to owner cash gifts being allowed, but not owners piling huge debt onto clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 16 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said: The only reason the ground and the club are separate are because of the daft, totally artificial FFP rules. Without them, Mel could have simply put the money in. But because of them, he had to construct an artificial way around to give money to the club. If anything shows the whole FFP concept should be done away with, then this is it. When the rules that were claimed would help clubs, turn out to hinder and actually damage them, those rules don't seem fit for purpose. Hypothetically... We could sell player 'A' for £1m with 6 months left on his contract and save £500k in wages. We'd be £1.5m financially better off but could end up with a 5 point penalty. Or we could not sell the player, not get the points deduction, but be £1.5m worse off. I know when Stoke got relegated, they wanted to sell a number of players but couldn't because they would have failed P&S (and got a big points deduction) as a result. Instead of getting some cash for the transfers and all of the wages off their books, they were effectively forced to loan those players out (wages covered) until their contracts expired. The rules sometimes prevent the thing they're trying to achieve. ?♂️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuwtfly Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 20 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said: The only reason the ground and the club are separate are because of the daft, totally artificial FFP rules. Without them, Mel could have simply put the money in. But because of them, he had to construct an artificial way around to give money to the club. If anything shows the whole FFP concept should be done away with, then this is it. When the rules that were claimed would help clubs, turn out to hinder and actually damage them, those rules don't seem fit for purpose. Is it the rules themselves, or the fact that we didn’t do a very good job of complying with them? I agree with your point on FFP on the whole. I think it does more harm than good and, if anything, it now causes the very problem it was meant to solve in the first place by allowing financial superpowers to go basically unchallenged... But there wouldn’t of been a need to go through the farcical stadium sale and cash injection in the first place if we had done a better job of complying to the rules in the first place. That’s on the managers, recruitment team, board and Mel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derby8 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said: Hypothetically... We could sell player 'A' for £1m with 6 months left on his contract and save £500k in wages. We'd be £1.5m financially better off but could end up with a 5 point penalty. Or we could not sell the player, not get the points deduction, but be £1.5m worse off. I know when Stoke got relegated, they wanted to sell a number of players but couldn't because they would have failed P&S (and got a big points deduction) as a result. Instead of getting some cash for the transfers and all of the wages off their books, they were effectively forced to loan those players out (wages covered) until their contracts expired. The rules sometimes prevent the thing they're trying to achieve. ?♂️ This sounds crazy. There is a view that ffp is just a means of raising the drawbridge to prevent competition with the current elite. Remember the then Manchester United c/e David Gill being one of the architects and saying what a good plan it was ! Suspect it puts off wealthy people who may wish to help a particular club. Believe that owners should be allowed to put cash in but not allowed to build up huge club debts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_RAM Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 2 hours ago, Coconut said: Anyone remember 10 days ago when we appointed Rooney as permanent manager and some people thought it could be a sign that the takeover was complete...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.