Abu Derby County

[hintonsboots]

20 minutes ago, Alty_Ram said:

Apparently we'll find out if that's true in the next 48 hours.

48 pages more like.

[strawhillram]

1 hour ago, Pearl Ram said:

Without wanting to stray into murky waters, I’m of the opinion Stephen Pearce is the Michael Gove of DCFC. 

Do people still listen to him ?

Gove over 

you’re taking the Michael

We would go into administeration (sic) with him at the helm.

[Rab a dab doo]

Why 48hrs why not 24 or even 12 ???????????????????

[strawhillram]

2 hours ago, IslandExile said:

Correction: "Albert Einstein is wrongly attributed to saying..."

He never said it. So that quotation was not factual either.

It was actually Bert Onestone from Wigan who originally said that. It was  later one Thursday night in his local boozer. He’d already had a couple of pints too many and was thinking about squeezing another cheeky one before closing time. No one knows if we did though.

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

Ok I may be wrong but I did read a convincing @Ghost of Cloughpost which suggested we’d make a small profit this year before covid losses   

1 hour ago, CornwallRam said:

No real way of knowing without the accounts. I'd be very surprised, but GoC does tend to know his stuff, so maybe.

To be honest, I'm now scratching my head trying to figure out how I reached that conclusion. I'm not sure if I was even referring to just P&S losses... I think I need to tidy up my spreadsheets up a bit ?‍♂️ Maybe I was talking about Mel not actually needing to put any money into the club this season if it wasn't for Covid? I estimate only £12m cash had to be put in for this season as a result. It seems to be backed up by cash generated through player sales, sponsorship and the broadcasting deal covering expenses up to this point, hence we suddenly have a cash flow issue. Now we need that £12m to cover wages for the rest of the season.

In terms of P&S/accounts, I find it easier working out our P&S position then calculating the group losses.

Based on the Disciplinary Decision Document, we have the 17/18 numbers, we have our provisional P&S position for 18/19, and we have an indication of what happened in 19/20.

As of March 2019:
     - 17/18 P&S profit = £7.207m
     - 18/19 P&S loss = £31.517m (provisional)

As of April 2019:
     - 18/19 amortisation = £4.6m
     - 19/20 amortisation = £25.1m

The £31.5m figure from March 2019 excludes the playoff income and Lampard compensation. Something like £6m combined? The final figure will likely be about £25.5m loss for 18/19.

However, something I had previously overlooked was when did the likes of Blackman, Johnson and Butterfield sign extensions? It's clear looking from the April 2019 figures that it was before that point. But, could it have been after we submitted our provisional figures in March?
Amortisation was £6.5m in 17/18 vs £4.6m in 18/19. Assuming all other costs and income were the same, we would have seen a P&S loss of £32.7m in 18/19.... Not far off the provisional figure so I think it's safe to assume the extensions were given before March. This supports a P&S loss of about £25.5m in 18/19.

Calculating our position further on from that is more difficult, but I'll have a stab in the dark anyway.

17/18 Figures
Wages = £40.5m
Amortisation = £6.5m
Player Profit = £3.7m
Manager Profit = £1.85m
Stadium = £39.9m (sale)
Sponsorship = £5m
P&S = 7.2m profit

19/20 Figures
Wages = £30m
Amortisation = £25.1m
Player Profit = £2.4m
Stadium = £1.1m (rent)
Sponsorship = £6.5m
P&S = 43.6m loss

20/21 Figures
Wages = £25m
Amortisation = £15m
Player Profit = £10m
Manager Profit = -£2m (compensation?)
Stadium = £1.1m (rent)
Sponsorship = £8m
P&S = 21.4m loss

Group Losses (non-Covid)
19/20 = c£50m loss
20/21 = c£28m loss

Group Losses (Covid)
19/20 = c£55m loss
20/21 = c£40m loss

P&S Figures (3/4 year periods)
19/20 = £1.8m over limit
20/21 = £11.8m over limit

However, there is a massive unknown in these calculations... "Administrative expenses". This figure was over £12m in the 16/17 and 17/18 accounts, £15m in 15/16. I'd expect a return to pre-15/16 levels (£8m), which brings us much closer to meeting the 20/21 P&S limit. Waghorn and Wisdom signing extensions would ease the P&S position too. 

[Comrade 86]

31 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

To be honest, I'm now scratching my head trying to figure out how I reached that conclusion. I'm not sure if I was even referring to just P&S losses... I think I need to tidy up my spreadsheets up a bit ?‍♂️ Maybe I was talking about Mel not actually needing to put any money into the club this season if it wasn't for Covid? I estimate only £12m cash had to be put in for this season as a result. It seems to be backed up by cash generated through player sales, sponsorship and the broadcasting deal covering expenses up to this point, hence we suddenly have a cash flow issue. Now we need that £12m to cover wages for the rest of the season.

In terms of P&S/accounts, I find it easier working out our P&S position then calculating the group losses.

Based on the Disciplinary Decision Document, we have the 17/18 numbers, we have our provisional P&S position for 18/19, and we have an indication of what happened in 19/20.

As of March 2019:
     - 17/18 P&S profit = £7.207m
     - 18/19 P&S loss = £31.517m (provisional)

As of April 2019:
     - 18/19 amortisation = £4.6m
     - 19/20 amortisation = £25.1m

The £31.5m figure from March 2019 excludes the playoff income and Lampard compensation. Something like £6m combined? The final figure will likely be about £25.5m loss for 18/19.

However, something I had previously overlooked was when did the likes of Blackman, Johnson and Butterfield sign extensions? It's clear looking from the April 2019 figures that it was before that point. But, could it have been after we submitted our provisional figures in March?
Amortisation was £6.5m in 17/18 vs £4.6m in 18/19. Assuming all other costs and income were the same, we would have seen a P&S loss of £32.7m in 18/19.... Not far off the provisional figure so I think it's safe to assume the extensions were given before March. This supports a P&S loss of about £25.5m in 18/19.

Calculating our position further on from that is more difficult, but I'll have a stab in the dark anyway.

17/18 Figures
Wages = £40.5m
Amortisation = £6.5m
Player Profit = £3.7m
Manager Profit = £1.85m
Stadium = £39.9m (sale)
Sponsorship = £5m
P&S = 7.2m profit

19/20 Figures
Wages = £30m
Amortisation = £25.1m
Player Profit = £2.4m
Stadium = £1.1m (rent)
Sponsorship = £6.5m
P&S = 43.6m loss

20/21 Figures
Wages = £25m
Amortisation = £15m
Player Profit = £10m
Manager Profit = -£2m (compensation?)
Stadium = £1.1m (rent)
Sponsorship = £8m
P&S = 21.4m loss

Group Losses (non-Covid)
19/20 = c£50m loss
20/21 = c£28m loss

Group Losses (Covid)
19/20 = c£55m loss
20/21 = c£40m loss

P&S Figures (3/4 year periods)
19/20 = £1.8m over limit
20/21 = £11.8m over limit

However, there is a massive unknown in these calculations... "Administrative expenses". This figure was over £12m in the 16/17 and 17/18 accounts, £15m in 15/16. I'd expect a return to pre-15/16 levels (£8m), which brings us much closer to meeting the 20/21 P&S limit. Waghorn and Wisdom signing extensions would ease the P&S position too. 

So essentially what you're saying is we may, or may not be buggered ?

[desirelines]

Mel lost all our money on GameStop 

[BucksRam]

2 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

To be honest, I'm now scratching my head trying to figure out how I reached that conclusion. I'm not sure if I was even referring to just P&S losses... I think I need to tidy up my spreadsheets up a bit ?‍♂️ Maybe I was talking about Mel not actually needing to put any money into the club this season if it wasn't for Covid? I estimate only £12m cash had to be put in for this season as a result. It seems to be backed up by cash generated through player sales, sponsorship and the broadcasting deal covering expenses up to this point, hence we suddenly have a cash flow issue. Now we need that £12m to cover wages for the rest of the season.

In terms of P&S/accounts, I find it easier working out our P&S position then calculating the group losses.

Based on the Disciplinary Decision Document, we have the 17/18 numbers, we have our provisional P&S position for 18/19, and we have an indication of what happened in 19/20.

As of March 2019:
     - 17/18 P&S profit = £7.207m
     - 18/19 P&S loss = £31.517m (provisional)

As of April 2019:
     - 18/19 amortisation = £4.6m
     - 19/20 amortisation = £25.1m

The £31.5m figure from March 2019 excludes the playoff income and Lampard compensation. Something like £6m combined? The final figure will likely be about £25.5m loss for 18/19.

However, something I had previously overlooked was when did the likes of Blackman, Johnson and Butterfield sign extensions? It's clear looking from the April 2019 figures that it was before that point. But, could it have been after we submitted our provisional figures in March?
Amortisation was £6.5m in 17/18 vs £4.6m in 18/19. Assuming all other costs and income were the same, we would have seen a P&S loss of £32.7m in 18/19.... Not far off the provisional figure so I think it's safe to assume the extensions were given before March. This supports a P&S loss of about £25.5m in 18/19.

Calculating our position further on from that is more difficult, but I'll have a stab in the dark anyway.

17/18 Figures
Wages = £40.5m
Amortisation = £6.5m
Player Profit = £3.7m
Manager Profit = £1.85m
Stadium = £39.9m (sale)
Sponsorship = £5m
P&S = 7.2m profit

19/20 Figures
Wages = £30m
Amortisation = £25.1m
Player Profit = £2.4m
Stadium = £1.1m (rent)
Sponsorship = £6.5m
P&S = 43.6m loss

20/21 Figures
Wages = £25m
Amortisation = £15m
Player Profit = £10m
Manager Profit = -£2m (compensation?)
Stadium = £1.1m (rent)
Sponsorship = £8m
P&S = 21.4m loss

Group Losses (non-Covid)
19/20 = c£50m loss
20/21 = c£28m loss

Group Losses (Covid)
19/20 = c£55m loss
20/21 = c£40m loss

P&S Figures (3/4 year periods)
19/20 = £1.8m over limit
20/21 = £11.8m over limit

However, there is a massive unknown in these calculations... "Administrative expenses". This figure was over £12m in the 16/17 and 17/18 accounts, £15m in 15/16. I'd expect a return to pre-15/16 levels (£8m), which brings us much closer to meeting the 20/21 P&S limit. Waghorn and Wisdom signing extensions would ease the P&S position too. 

Regardless of accuracy the fact you've sat down and worked through all this gets my respect. 

[SouthernRam]

19 hours ago, europia said:

I guess a reluctant owner is better than a disingenuous owner, or no owner at all.... 

100%. No one can question Mel’s intentions. If anything it’s his passion for the club that has often clouded his judgement.

As long as we can steady the ship this season and avoid relegation, we will have avoided a potentially catastrophic new era of ownership.

Let’s hope Mel has learned his lesson and we can find new owners with a sustainable vision for the club.

[Grumpy Git]

I've got some Green Shield Stamps in a cupboard somewhere. I'm quite happy to donate these if anyone thinks they'll help?

[derby8]

20 minutes ago, SouthernRam said:

100%. No one can question Mel’s intentions. If anything it’s his passion for the club that has often clouded his judgement.

As long as we can steady the ship this season and avoid relegation, we will have avoided a potentially catastrophic new era of ownership.

Let’s hope Mel has learned his lesson and we can find new owners with a sustainable vision for the club.

Looking around at other football clubs. Many have problems going forward. Derby County could be a good buy for someone. Modern stadium, could be extended, maybe a little maintenance backlog, commercial possibilities around the site, good training ground. The ffp rules will doubtless be reviewed, tweaked for covid, and a salary cap along with the rolling deficit maxima. Think Derby need a 'Daniel Levy' type character coming in, someone in for the long haul who takes a strategic long term view.

[ilkleyram]

What if Mel is actually playing a blinder?

We all know that this is the worst transfer window for making signings that are cheap enough and good enough for any club, let alone ours that has been ripped off for many a season.  We are now getting to movement time - the last four days - when all/most of the deals are done and prices shift, mostly in the favour of the selling clubs that don’t have to sell.  What better time for the football world - clubs, agents, players, authorities - to know that we are broke, about to enter administration, that our owner doesn’t care any more, has run out of money and may not be too well, and that we are still 48 hours away from selling to a dodgy overseas person with a track record and no money? No point in trying to sell us a player worth £1m for £2m because we can’t afford it. In fact all we can afford is £750k.

What if the deal has actually been done, signed and money transferred, but not announced? Or what if Mel has already pulled out and is seeking new investment elsewhere but is going to carry on in the meantime?

If we were to announce the Sheikh before Monday evening, prices and wages for players - loan and purchase - could rocket; if Mel is back in financial charge we’ve already seen prices rocket in past years.  What if Mel is fed up with being ripped off?

There are only a very few people on the planet (+ advisors) that know what is really happening.  The rest of us are guessing.  The players don’t know, as it would have leaked by now; the staff don’t either - ditto.  But it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that Mel (or the sheikh) is using Sky, Percy, the EFL and all the rest of them to put out the message that we’re struggling to get the deal over the line, that we’re broke, that we’re about to go into administration, because he wants to reset the external view of us as a club with loads of money and that he doesn’t want to overpay in the transfer window, this one or future ones, that he wants to reset wages and reduce costs. Short term PR pain for longer term gain.

This is, after all, the worst possible month for everyone to know that we have money to spend and the worst possible time in that month.

[Chester40]

1 minute ago, ilkleyram said:

What if Mel is actually playing a blinder?

We all know that this is the worst transfer window for making signings that are cheap enough and good enough for any club, let alone ours that has been ripped off for many a season.  We are now getting to movement time - the last four days - when all/most of the deals are done and prices shift, mostly in the favour of the selling clubs that don’t have to sell.  What better time for the football world - clubs, agents, players, authorities - to know that we are broke, about to enter administration, that our owner doesn’t care any more, has run out of money and may not be too well, and that we are still 48 hours away from selling to a dodgy overseas person with a track record and no money? No point in trying to sell us a player worth £1m for £2m because we can’t afford it. In fact all we can afford is £750k.

What if the deal has actually been done, signed and money transferred, but not announced? Or what if Mel has already pulled out and is seeking new investment elsewhere but is going to carry on in the meantime?

If we were to announce the Sheikh before Monday evening, prices and wages for players - loan and purchase - could rocket; if Mel is back in financial charge we’ve already seen prices rocket in past years.  What if Mel is fed up with being ripped off?

There are only a very few people on the planet (+ advisors) that know what is really happening.  The rest of us are guessing.  The players don’t know, as it would have leaked by now; the staff don’t either - ditto.  But it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that Mel (or the sheikh) is using Sky, Percy, the EFL and all the rest of them to put out the message that we’re struggling to get the deal over the line, that we’re broke, that we’re about to go into administration, because he wants to reset the external view of us as a club with loads of money and that he doesn’t want to overpay in the transfer window, this one or future ones, that he wants to reset wages and reduce costs. Short term PR pain for longer term gain.

This is, after all, the worst possible month for everyone to know that we have money to spend and the worst possible time in that month.

Wishful thinking...

Would that it were..! 

[BIllyD]

On 14/01/2021 at 08:19, Ghost of Clough said:

Due to Covid. I'm certain we'd be posting a profit in the accounts for 20/21 otherwise.

Wages should now be at a sustainable level in non-Covid times, less than 100% of income.

I remember the post very well as it was in response to mine when I said we wouldn't be close to posting a profit even without COVID. I also remember you commenting on I had no foundation for my comment and you are very rarely wrong....just putting it out there as you forgot what you said ?

[Amberram]

[BriggRam]

7 hours ago, loweman2 said:

has anything of any factuailty been written on this post since the first pages ? 

Albert Einstein is widely credited with saying, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.”

have people lives really come to this ?

If I keep on thinking what I’ve always thought,
then I’ll keep on perceiving what I’ve always perceived.
If I keep on perceiving what I’ve always perceived,
then I’ll keep on seeing what I’ve always seen.
If I keep on seeing what I’ve always seen,
then I’ll keep on doing what I’ve always done.
If I keep on doing what I’ve always done,
then I’ll keep on getting what I’ve always gotten.

 

Seems the only person that has stated facts is the Geordie 430 odd pages ago 

[Rev]

5 minutes ago, BriggRam said:

Seems the only person that has stated facts is the Geordie 430 odd pages ago 

It's played out pretty much as he said it would, maybe some people owe him an apology?

[strawhillram]

Í have accepted that nothing will happen. Be glad to just keep what we have

[CornwallRam]

I think for me the alarm bels really started ringing when pretty much every Newcastle fan blamed their takeover collapsing on BZI, rather than Mike Ashley.  In Geordie land, Ashley gets blamed for World War 2, the shooting of JFK, HIV and the rebranding of Marathon Bars into Snickers. 

[loweman2]

38 minutes ago, BriggRam said:

Seems the only person that has stated facts is the Geordie 430 odd pages ago 

 

On 31/10/2020 at 09:50, Newcastle Fan said:

Hi all.  You’ll be able to tell from my username where I’m coming from.  I saw the ‘takeover’ talk of Derby via an NUFC link - just thought you might like a perspective from a club who the Bin Zayed Group ‘tried’ to buy previously.  Hopefully you will all take this in the spirit in which it is meant - it’s a shame to see these chancers being linked to a ‘proper’ club like DCFC.  If the East Midlands press is as poo as the North East, chances are they’ll not report this.

I’ll get this out of the way straight away; you won’t be taken over by this lot.  They’re potless.  They’re after the publicity.  The bloke in charge of the organisation simply has a very similar name to the actual crown prince of Abu Dhabi.  It would be like a bloke called Charles Windsor being mistaken for Prince Charles.  He isn’t the ‘cousin’ of the Man City owner - he’s some sort of distant relative (plenty of them in that neck of the woods).  The fact that the BZG did nothing to disabuse anyone of the fact that the press routinely mix their chairman up with the crown prince of Abu Dhabi says everything - he’s a con man.  He works out of a pokey office in Dubai.  He’s not a rich scion of the royal family.  The man is called Sheikh Khaled bin Zayed al-Nahyan (note he doesn’t use ‘HH’ before his name - the equivalent of ‘HRH’) - he is NOT HH Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, who is the man who is crown prince (and who the papers kept confusing with), nor is he HH Khalid bin Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, who is a member of the royal family.  The lazy bar stewards in the North East kept running this story well past the point that these jokers were exposed.

When they ‘bid’ for Newcastle in 2019, we had Liverpool supporters telling us they were tyre-kickers.  They were right.  They had contacted Mike Ashley, who told them the price - they then put out that they had ‘agreed’ the purchase of the club.  For about six weeks the papers waited for them to show proof of funds (a knacker called Midhat was the PR man - watch out for his ********).  The proof of funds never materialised - because they’re potless.  

Hopefully no-one here is confused with the current takeover lot at Newcastle - that is actually the Saudi state (legal stuff is happening re that at present).  It certainly isn’t that lot.

Just a heads-up that it is a waste of time to even think about this chancer buying the club - he hasn’t the cash.  Unfortunately, they took in a lot of our support with their ******** - helped by the uselessness of the football press.  Please don’t waste your time thinking about what will happen under them - this is as far as it will ever get.

With that, all the best for the coming season.  I hope it will be understood that this post was not meant with any animosity - I’ve no negative feelings re Derby (after all, they play in the correct colours and have a dislike of Forest - both sensible & good things). Derby is a grand old club, and it irritates me seeing this bunch of chancers being linked with another historic English club.  
 

edit: I’ve just seen that they gave Ashley a £30m deposit.  No they didn’t - that was the Saudis.  The Bin Zayed Group didn’t even get past the ‘proof of funds’ stage.  Don’t mix up the Saudi PIF and this lot. 

Could have saved 430 pages ?