Please don’t blame Morris and Pearce.

[Carnero]

1 minute ago, duncanjwitham said:

I don't see how that can possibly apply to our case, given there's no active market.

You're right, if only they could set up some sort of transfer system in football.

[duncanjwitham]

3 minutes ago, Carnero said:

You're right, if only they could set up some sort of transfer system in football.

From the LAP written reasons: 

None of those really apply to the football transfer system. 

[G STAR RAM]

6 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

This is from FRS102 (https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/69f7d814-c806-4ccc-b451-aba50d6e8de2/FRS-102-FRS-applicable-in-the-UK-and-Republic-of-Ireland-(March-2018).pdf) :

I don't see how that can possibly apply to our case, given there's no active market.

If I remember correctly, the issue with the unclear wording in the accounts was basically that we said we were using RVs when we were actually using Estimated Recovery Values.

In what way is there not an active market for the asset?

[Simon84]

The recruitment, lack of financial planning and assets stripping is unforgivable. From a sports and business perspective they have failed miserably. The three amigos did time but still left us in a better position. You can’t seriously defend them after what has happened / what they have caused. 

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

In what way is there not an active market for the asset?

See the extract in my post above. Players aren't homogenous, they aren't traded often enough for there to be comparative prices available,  and the prices are not available to the public anyway.

It's not like houses, where you can value a 3 bedroom semi in Chellaston by comparing it to the dozens of other 3 bedroom semis in Chellaston that have been sold in the last year or so.  To value say Jozwiak, you'd need a bunch of other new mid-level European team international wingers, with X years left on their contracts, playing in the championship, that have been sold in the last couple of seasons...  

[Van der MoodHoover]

29 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

See the extract in my post above. Players aren't homogenous, they aren't traded often enough for there to be comparative prices available,  and the prices are not available to the public anyway.

It's not like houses, where you can value a 3 bedroom semi in Chellaston by comparing it to the dozens of other 3 bedroom semis in Chellaston that have been sold in the last year or so.  To value say Jozwiak, you'd need a bunch of other new mid-level European team international wingers, with X years left on their contracts, playing in the championship, that have been sold in the last couple of seasons...  

I think it likely that this was a point of disagreement between dcfc and the EFL and the responses on the forum show that things are not necessarily cut and dried. 

I wrote somewhere that I wondered whether the transfer window concept could be used to argue that the active market criteria were not met. 

Of course, it would have been more useful, if the intention of the EFL was not to allow residual values for them to issue guidance in advance, but that seemed beyond them. 

[Spanish]

2 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

I think it likely that this was a point of disagreement between dcfc and the EFL and the responses on the forum show that things are not necessarily cut and dried. 

I wrote somewhere that I wondered whether the transfer window concept could be used to argue that the active market criteria were not met. 

Of course, it would have been more useful, if the intention of the EFL was not to allow residual values for them to issue guidance in advance, but that seemed beyond them. 

this is where I was for a time but the 2 x DC and LAP findings indicate to me at least that they had no intention of writing rules but required compliance with accounting standards.  It is when you get to 18.2 when it gets wobbly.  Many accountants think it compliant, a professor of accounting that LAP relied upon does not.

[G STAR RAM]

45 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

See the extract in my post above. Players aren't homogenous, they aren't traded often enough for there to be comparative prices available,  and the prices are not available to the public anyway.

It's not like houses, where you can value a 3 bedroom semi in Chellaston by comparing it to the dozens of other 3 bedroom semis in Chellaston that have been sold in the last year or so.  To value say Jozwiak, you'd need a bunch of other new mid-level European team international wingers, with X years left on their contracts, playing in the championship, that have been sold in the last couple of seasons...  

Thats where making accouting estimates comes into play.

To suggest there is no active market would suggest no transfer market.

 

[Spanish]

the active market argument is really confusing

The LAP is quoted

44. The Club’s case was that it used the Cost Model, and that there was no “Active Market”.
It accepted that it was obliged to amortise the intangible asset, namely the right to the
player’s registration over the period of the player contract, because at the end of the player contract the right to the player’s registration had no residual value.
 

the club's argument is that they did amortize on a cost basis just not in a straight line.

Just my reading, happy to be advised otherwise

 

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, Spanish said:

this is where I was for a time but the 2 x DC and LAP findings indicate to me at least that they had no intention of writing rules but required compliance with accounting standards.  It is when you get to 18.2 when it gets wobbly.  Many accountants think it compliant, a professor of accounting that LAP relied upon does not.

Absolutely - and to my mind that requires guidance. 

Maybe it's because my career is now in risk and as soon as you set a policy someone asks you exactly what you mean so you end up writing a guidance note to explain the intended outcome, points of ambiguity etc.... 

[Spanish]

18 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Absolutely - and to my mind that requires guidance. 

Maybe it's because my career is now in risk and as soon as you set a policy someone asks you exactly what you mean so you end up writing a guidance note to explain the intended outcome, points of ambiguity etc.... 

been in that sector for over 20 years probably why I don't immediately dismiss something I don't agree with

[WystonRam]

3 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Thats where making accouting estimates comes into play.

To suggest there is no active market would suggest no transfer market.

 

There is comment in the last disciplinary hearing that specifically deals with our amortisation policy. Specifically that there should be no value at the end of the contract. It isn't that there is not a market but a player out of contract has no value.

 

 

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, WystonRam said:

There is comment in the last disciplinary hearing that specifically deals with our amortisation policy. Specifically that there should be no value at the end of the contract. It isn't that there is not a market but a player out of contract has no value.

 

 

The residual values were assigned at the beginning of the last year of the contracts and then amortised down to £0 over that last year, at last that is my understanding of it.

Players theoretically could still have a resale value up until 1 day before the end of their contract but the reality now is that they lose all of their value once they have entered the last year.

[Van der MoodHoover]

7 hours ago, WystonRam said:

There is comment in the last disciplinary hearing that specifically deals with our amortisation policy. Specifically that there should be no value at the end of the contract. It isn't that there is not a market but a player out of contract has no value.

 

 

Basically I think everyone is agreeing that the value at point of contract expiration is 0.

Dcfc realised that and were depreciating to that end point. 

However, describing the approach inaccurately is a huge own goal. What kind of a numpty finance function does dcfc have? 

[Derby blood]

I will say it once more, Mel has failed and the sooner the club is sold, the better, we need ti move on, and we will once Mel has gone. 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

The three amigos maliciously messed the club up, Mel and Pearce have blundered in to it whilst trying to push us on.

The end result isn't much different, so I don't see why Mel should get a free pass to be honest.

 

[NottsRam77]

1 minute ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

The three amigos maliciously messed the club up, Mel and Pearce have blundered in to it whilst trying to push us on.

The end result isn't much different, so I don't see why Mel should get a free pass to be honest.

 

Agree 

Whatever mels intentions and I do genuinely believe they were always for the best for the club he too loves like us this is turning into a rooster up of epic proportions 

I hope health wise he’s ok on all fronts I’m sure this isn’t how he envisaged any of this turning out 

[GboroRam]

19 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:

See the extract in my post above. Players aren't homogenous, they aren't traded often enough for there to be comparative prices available,  and the prices are not available to the public anyway.

It's not like houses, where you can value a 3 bedroom semi in Chellaston by comparing it to the dozens of other 3 bedroom semis in Chellaston that have been sold in the last year or so.  To value say Jozwiak, you'd need a bunch of other new mid-level European team international wingers, with X years left on their contracts, playing in the championship, that have been sold in the last couple of seasons...  

Active market more describes widgets, or tins of beans. A million miles away from footballers. 

[Comrade 86]

On 24/06/2021 at 08:25, Curtains said:

Noticed some people having a go .

We are Derby fans and we should stick together and back the Club 

Its easy to be derogatory about the owners in this situation but the real enemy is the EFL 

They are an absolute joke of an institution and don’t get me started on Steve Gibson and Wycombe Wanderers

Admire your loyalty fella but in all honesty, all these threads of yours simply serve to give the handwringers yet another soapbox from which to slaughter all things DCFC. Can't even bring myself to scan this thread as I know exactly what I'll be reading and precisely who will have posted it... for the 100th time!

Hold the club close to your heart, keep the faith and enjoy the new season, old bean. Whilst we don't always agree on everything, fans like you are the lifeblood of the club. Always were, always will be. 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

6 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Admire your loyalty fella but in all honesty, all these threads of yours simply serve to give the handwringers yet another soapbox from which to slaughter all things DCFC. Can't even bring myself to scan this thread as I know exactly what I'll be reading and precisely who will have posted it... for the 100th time!

Hold the club close to your heart, keep the faith and enjoy the new season, old bean. Whilst we don't always agree on everything, fans like you are the lifeblood of the club. Always were, always will be. 

Which suggests you think people criticising our current owner for getting us in to this mess are not also part of the lifeblood of the club?

I am angry because I care. I want the club to be looked after, not run in a way that risks it's very existence.