Has the transfer embargo been lifted?

[Ramslad1992]

28 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

We'd be able to sign an emergency keeper if Roos picked up an injury.

They would make us play one of ours I bet! At this rate we will be in the history books for being the first team to field a woman in the men’s team! 

[rammieib]

1 hour ago, Charlotte Ram said:

Government guidance, article in Daily telegraph

Following the promotion of Norwich City, Watford and Brentford from the Championship last season, only the west London club would fall under that 20,000 capacity at their Brentford Community Stadium (17,250), meaning they could have the option to ignore the use of Covid passports when fans return in great numbers this month.

The Premier League could choose to adopt a uniform approach though, which would see Brentford fall in line with the other 19 clubs and enforce Covid passports for supporters to gain entry.

While most Championship clubs would be under pressure to introduce them, most League One and Two teams would not be.

One Championship club that could be spared is Peterborough United, whose stadium holds only 15,000 and whose owner, Darragh MacAnthony, last week branded plans to roll out Covid certification a “disgrace”, accusing the measure of “punishing” the young.

 

Thanks. Nothing has gone mainstream yet on this, checked the EFL site as well.

Maybe its all advisory guidance to see what clubs may adopt, but leave it to the clubs?

[Tyler Durden]

11 minutes ago, Ramslad1992 said:

They would make us play one of ours I bet! At this rate we will be in the history books for being the first team to field a woman in the men’s team! 

 

[CornwallRam]

2 hours ago, EnigmaRam said:

I really wish this would just end and we can get back to some normality. I’m so bored of embargo’s, points deductions, takeovers, submission of accounts etc. 

Remember when we got worked up about McClaren not having a plan B.

[Jourdan]

If the embargo related to just the accounts, you could understand the club’s frustration. The EFL case being a determining factor in the non-submission or delayed submission.

However we’ve also seemingly defaulted on payments both to clubs and HMRC. And as we know the players’ wages have been unpaid in the past, hence the suspended points deduction.

So really do we have a leg to stand on? You can’t financially mismanage a club to the extent ours has been and expect rules to be relaxed for your benefit.

I think we just have to suck it up. It’s a grim situation, obviously compounded by the complete inexperience amongst the coaching staff too.

But I think we simply have to hope the young players can beat the odds. You never know, some of them might actually flourish with this unexpected opportunity.

Personally I can’t say I’ll be too upset at not being able to sign Baldock, Stearman and company.

[Philmycock]

If only we had a presence on the EFL board

[JfR]

Does anyone know why we were able to bring in the 5 loans in January but now can't do anything?

[CornwallRam]

Just now, JfR said:

Does anyone know why we were able to bring in the 5 loans in January but now can't do anything?

Yes

[Philmycock]

Just now, CornwallRam said:

Yes

Chorley Covid kids innit?

[Ken Tram]

On 18/07/2021 at 19:49, Tyler Durden said:

I know but I don't think Mel Morris would dare put an advert out saying donations from any philanthropists welcome as at the moment that's what it would be considered, not an investment. 

Derby are not seen as a viable business proposition let's face it.

It feels like that! But, just like anything on the market, the club must have a value! There is probably an established method of calculating such values. (Although, of course, only if one uses standard football accounting principles!)

However, I am wondering, even if the club has a negative value (!) - if a potential investor thinks that they can have a positive effect on the value - maybe that still makes it investable? (Is this just Alice in Wonderland economics?)

Say that a generic football club has a value of -£10m overall. If I were to buy it for, say £1, I guess that I would take on the debts (and form and prospects and assets, etc). If I then reduced the debts, and improved the prospects, so that the value was only -£5m - then, if I came to sell it - I guess that I could still only sell it on for £1!

So, maybe you're right. Maybe Derby is not a viable business proposition - due sale to a majority owner.

But, what about selling shares to small investors (such as fans who are blinded by their love of the club, and see emotional value, where traditional owners might only see cash value). But, if such an "investments" by fans helped clear the debt, then the value of the club might stop being negative, and become positive. (And clearing the debt might enable greater prospects too, further increasing the value of the club.) And, if the club has a positive value, and the value increases, so then does the value of the shares. Therefore, any potential major investor and owner, will not face the question of the club being worth £1, but, they face the opportunity to increase the value, and make a return. So, if fan-investors can push a club into having a positive value, that makes it investable - we may well be the only investors capable of achieving this.

PS. I am not sure administration has much of a future, if, as someone said, finagling debts are not written off of the club is to continue.

 

[I8Forest78]

How can EFL punish us??When the players in question didnt play in an EFL competition!!FA Cup wasnt it??????

[RoyMac5]

43 minutes ago, Jourdan said:

But I think we simply have to hope the young players can beat the odds. You never know, some of them might actually flourish with this unexpected opportunity.

Personally I can’t say I’ll be too upset at not being able to sign Baldock, Stearman and company.

We saw last season they didn't flourish. They need experienced players around them to help them develop.

[California Ram.]

As I read it - we have 19 contracted players with a first team game plus the 'Chorley 8', when we're allowed 23. 

If we put the 'Chorley 8' out on loan - then we'd have room for 4 new players regardless of EFL approval ? (Thompson, Aghatise, Bardell, Solomon, Williams, Ibrahim, Cybulski, Duncan)

We could of course always loan out (or even sell) some of the 19 as well 

Marshall/Roos

Bryne/Buchanan/Forsyth/McDonald/Brown

Bielik/Shinnie/Bird/Joswiak/Lawrence/Sibley/Knight/Watson/Hutchinson/Ebosele/

Kazim-Richards/Stretton.

Edited July 19, 2021 by California Ram.

[RoyMac5]

5 minutes ago, California Ram. said:

As I read it - we have 19 contracted players with a first team game plus the 'Chorley 8', when we're allowed 23. 

If we put the 'Chorley 8' out on loan - then we'd have room for 4 new players regardless of EFL approval ? (Thompson, Aghatise, Bardell, Solomon, Williams, Ibrahim, Cybulski, Duncan)

Putting players out on loan doesn't take them off our numbers.

[Ken Tram]

2 hours ago, GenBr said:

I agree. However you need every single club on board to make it a reality. Derby could easily be run at a profit, but if every other club is still pouring money into their teams you're going to struggle to be competitive in any of the professional leagues.

It needs change from the top, but unless the government steps in i can't ever see that happening.

I agree with you too. ?

Maybe, Derby need to lead the way. Maybe this is what is really meant by the Derby Way!

The question may not be ... what does everyone else do ... but second guess what is needed for future success for Derby.

[Spanish]

39 minutes ago, I8Forest78 said:

How can EFL punish us??When the players in question didnt play in an EFL competition!!FA Cup wasnt it??????

It’s in the rules

[Taribo]

8 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Putting players out on loan doesn't take them off our numbers.

Wouldn’t surprise me if we ‘sell’ them all for nothing to any teams interested in loaning them and set a buy back price. 

it’s a sad situation but releasing our home-grown talented promising youths might be the only way to sign some over the hill ‘experienced’ players

[Sheikh n Bake]

Could we write an 'I Owe You' to our free agents and have them play for us despite not being contracted to the club? That'll really piss Gibson and the EFL off. 

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, Taribo said:

Wouldn’t surprise me if we ‘sell’ them all for nothing to any teams interested in loaning them and set a buy back price. 

it’s a sad situation but releasing our home-grown talented promising youths might be the only way to sign some over the hill ‘experienced’ players

'Over the hill' is a bit strong - say that about CKR? They've got something to give the club and we should appreciate that.

[Jourdan]

40 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

We saw last season they didn't flourish. They need experienced players around them to help them develop.

Surely by that logic then, this situation also calls for an experienced manager?

The entire situation is just an illustration of our poor decision making on multiple fronts rapidly catching up with us.

Of course, in an ideal world, we would want a nice mix of youth and experience, quality and steel and indeed too a manager with nous and experience.

But with the season beginning in less than 3 weeks, we are reaching the stage where acceptance that it will be anything but might be the best remedy.

I mean look at the players we have targeted, do you think they will be a big miss? As with most things at the club, it doesn’t seem like much thought has gone into the process, beyond sheer availability.

Playing the kids will almost definitely reduce our competitive edge, but let’s be honest, expectations will be at rock bottom anyway.

It will probably galvanise fans more than seeing players long in the tooth mailing it in.  The only exception being Davies and Wisdom as at least they have some attachment to the club and an idea of what it means to wear our particular black and white shirt.

Edited July 19, 2021 by Jourdan