EFL appeal

[G STAR RAM]

8 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Looks like he doesn't take into account contracts extending, spreading the amortisation charges out further

Cant see that this would have any real major impact to the figures. £2m or £3m at most. There werent many players that had their contracts extended were there?

[Carnero]

Whatever the amortisation policy how the hell can we breach the rules in any 3 year period including 17/18 with the £40m profit on stadium sake? That would be a >£79m loss over 3 years excluding the stadium sale.

We only spent big in one season 15/16 without making significant player sales like we've made in other seasons (Hughes, Hendrick, Ince, Vydra, Weimann, Bogle, Lowe,).

[G STAR RAM]

Just now, Carnero said:

Whatever the amortisation policy how the hell can we breach the rules in any 3 year period including 17/18 with the £40m profit on stadium sake? That would be a >£79m loss over 3 years excluding the stadium sale.

We only spent big in one season 15/16 without making significant player sales like we've made in other seasons (Hughes, Hendrick, Ince, Vydra, Weimann, Bogle, Lowe,).

I think our wage bill topping £40m may have something to do with it!

[YouRams]

6 hours ago, Ken Tram said:

How fascinating that a given set of accounts can be adjudged to have not broken the rules - and yet the same figures can be worthy of being re-evaluated - implying that there is a grey area about how the figures should be evaluated and calculated.

Shows just how much of a shoddy organisation the EFL is, rather than hold their hands up and say we have a flaw in our rules that rightly or wrongly has been taken advantage of, and we should now adjust those rules, they’d rather try and save face and take not only a club but a fan base down. I hope the lot of them stand on a plug then stub their little toe.

[Comrade 86]

40 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Its a pretty reasonable assumption to make if the historical data shows a trend. 

One thing I would say though, is didn't we start handing out ridiculously long contracts of 4 years as standard procedure around this time?

I agree but the point I was kind of alluding to is that it is an *assumption* and that the figure cited, which would leave us breaching mandatory thresholds, is therefore subject to ratification. As has always been the case with Mr Maguire, in respect of his ramblings over Derby's finances, he's rather jumped the gun. I'd cite his commentary on the sale of the PP as an example. 

I'm not sure about the long contracts query but I do believe this is when we started the policy of extending contracts where allowing them to run down would have been "an issue". I'm still very much in the 'no case to answer' camp in any case, not because I have my head in the sand but because the residual value amortisation methodology was expressly agreed with the EFL prior to its uptake and the manner in which it was employed was examined and deemed within the regs by the independent tribunal. Some folk (not you obviously!) need to understand that whatever methodology is employed, the net hit in the end is exactly the same. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by 86 Hair Islands

[kevinhectoring]

4 minutes ago, YouRams said:

Shows just how much of a shoddy organisation the EFL is, rather than hold their hands up and say we have a flaw in our rules that rightly or wrongly has been taken advantage of, and we should now adjust those rules, they’d rather try and save face and take not only a club but a fan base down. I hope the lot of them stand on a plug then stub their little toe.

???  Don’t we need to read the judgement before saying things like this. 
And sure, criticise the EFL for appealing, fair enough. But the Appeals panel is independent and their job is simply to apply the rules as they read them

[Comrade 86]

20 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Looks like he doesn't take into account contracts extending, spreading the amortisation charges out further

This was my very first thought, but I'm wondering whether bringing that into the debate is the wisest move ? 

I fear a few on here are close to...

 

[Carnero]

17 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I think our wage bill topping £40m may have something to do with it!

We did used to have income around £30m too though!!

[YouRams]

7 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

???  Don’t we need to read the judgement before saying things like this. 
And sure, criticise the EFL for appealing, fair enough. But the Appeals panel is independent and their job is simply to apply the rules as they read them

Not at all it’s obvious to everyone what the EFL are like even before this, with what they’ve done to other clubs and they’ve had it in for Mel the past few years. How can an independent panel deem the books to be ok on first look but not on the appeal it absolutely stinks to me. 

[G STAR RAM]

8 minutes ago, Carnero said:

We did used to have income around £30m too though!!

But even still that is in excess of £30m loss over 3 years before you even begin to factor in any of the other running costs and transfer fees.

[1967RAMS]

Does anyone know for certain, if we receive a points deduction. Will it  be next season starting on minus or capital be added retrospectively ?

[duncanjwitham]

21 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Cant see that this would have any real major impact to the figures. £2m or £3m at most. There werent many players that had their contracts extended were there?

There were the short extensions for Johnson, Blackman and Butterfield - that would spread ~£15m over 5 years instead of 4.  There were the automatic extensions to Huddlestone and Davies, that's £3m over another year.  Not massive amounts, but not nothing either.

The bigger issue will be with not knowing the exact individual fees for players, so you can't account for contract length or when they were sold.  The accounts will tell us we spent £50m in a given year, but we have no idea how much of that will be amortized over 2 years, 3 years, 4, years etc.  And when players are sold, we have no idea how much to knock off the amortization for subsequent years - both Vydra and Ince were sold (for profit) midway through their contracts.  Various other players have left for various reasons too - Raul Albentosa sold for profit after a season or so, Weimann sold after 3 years, Abdul Camara had his contract cancelled etc etc.  We can't always even be sure which financial year a player was sold in, if it's close to June 30th. There's going to be a massive amount of guesswork involved in doing it this way.

[1967RAMS]

Just now, 1967RAMS said:

Does anyone know for certain, if we receive a points deduction. Will it  be next season starting on minus or capital be added retrospectively ?

Can it be added retrospectively 

[MackworthRamIsGod]

It annoys me Kieran Maguire gets so much air time from Derby media sources.

He was the one who complained to the EFL about our accounting practices. Why? What was it to him?

We are in this mess partly, if not largely, down to him.

[Barney1991]

15 hours ago, inter politics said:

I'm not saying who's right, as I haven't calculated it. Just for reference.

So over 3 years it’s still under the threshold then 

[Turnstile]

25 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

It annoys me Kieran Maguire gets so much air time from Derby media sources.

He was the one who complained to the EFL about our accounting practices. Why? What was it to him?

We are in this mess partly, if not largely, down to him.

We’re in this mess largely down to Mel.

[Sparkle]

Just help me recap 

what we did was perfectly legal for a business?
we asked the EFL if it was ok to do this? 

they said yes ? 
 

what we didn’t do was explain it by painting by numbers? 
we haven’t ignored our finances as they all catch up with whatever system is used

am I correct ? 

 

[desirelines]

Does the EFL have a head office? If so, I wonder if a healthy dose of civil unrest/peaceful protest outside their headquarters protesting against their incompetence is in order? Obviously our chairman is no saint, but the EFL have shown again and again that they'd rather make football fans suffer than admit they did anything wrong. 

[Sparkle]

2 minutes ago, Turnstile said:

We’re in this mess largely down to Mel.

Putting his own money in - it’s probably down to Sam Rush actually but MM should have trusted him.

[G STAR RAM]

32 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

There were the short extensions for Johnson, Blackman and Butterfield - that would spread ~£15m over 5 years instead of 4. 

It wouldnt though as they will already have had amortisation charges for the first 4 years of their contracts.

All it will do is spread the remaining value over 2 years rather than 1.