Derby county value

[Bianoic]

23 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Other owners don't spend so much.

We encouraged him to do so 

[G STAR RAM]

6 hours ago, 1967RAMS said:

The club’s debts massively outweigh its assets. Nobody will be stupid enough to pay anything for it. Mel will not recoup any of his massive outlay. I am pretty sure debts can’t just be written off by an owner any longer. I fail to see any option other than administration. Take the hit and just hope someone will buy us out of it and start afresh 

Can you give the breakdown and where you got the information from please?

You've stated a few times that you think administration is the best option but seem to have very little, if any, understanding of finances. 

3 hours ago, Big Trav said:

It’s a club who don’t own their stadium or training ground. Have over 50 million worth of debt. 9 senior players. A threadbare league 1 stands red squad. Mel wants someone to buy a house at full price when it’s needs at least 2x more money spent on doing it up 

Source?

[ram59]

34 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Other owners don't spend so much.

Other owners have also spent more, but fortunately for them, have gained promotion, such as QPR, Wolves, Villa, etc. QPR and Villa achieving it by beating us in a 1 off play off final.

[BaaLocks]

2 hours ago, Oldben said:

What's it costing Mel to run the club on a monthly basis.

If the clubs relegated he gets 10 to 20 million max for the club

These are tens of millions of pounds being spoken about like they are calculating the tip for a curry. More money than (hey, I'll take a guess) everyone on this forum will see in their entire life. But the key point remains, it's all irrelevant - market price, what he wants, the value of the academy. The only number that matter is what someone is prepared to pay for it - which is currently a lot less than it would have to be for many other similarly sized clubs. So we can argue ourselves blue about whether or not we have the potential to be Premier League, if our history makes us attractive, the fact we have spent a lot of time in the top flight etc, etc, etc. Holds no value at all.

[BaaLocks]

21 minutes ago, Bianoic said:

We encouraged him to do so 

I must have missed the 'Sign Jacob Butterfield now' banners. Indeed, I remember on that deadline day many on here and other places decrying it as lunacy. On the day, not five years later.

[G STAR RAM]

4 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

I must have missed the 'Sign Jacob Butterfield now' banners. Indeed, I remember on that deadline day many on here and other places decrying it as lunacy. On the day, not five years later.

I don't, exactly the opposite actually as I remember it.

We sign who we want and Rush always gets his man, was more the order of the day.

Amazing how history can be re-written with time though. 

[BaaLocks]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I don't, exactly the opposite actually as I remember it.

We sign who we want and Rush always gets his man, was more the order of the day.

Amazing how history can be re-written with time though. 

Nope, we signed Butterfield for £4m and I recall reading little else than that he was bang average. Bradley Johnson for £6m was, as I recall, seen as a decent player but well over priced - though even that generosity was a bit lost as he didn't even know the name of the club he had signed for. By the time we got to Blackman and Olsson I don't recall too many feeling comfortable with what was happening. It's not history by the way, I'm not re-writing anything, I'm just saying how I remember it.

[RoyMac5]

4 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

Nope, we signed Butterfield for £4m and I recall reading little else than that he was bang average. Bradley Johnson for £6m was, as I recall, seen as a decent player but well over priced - though even that generosity was a bit lost as he didn't even know the name of the club he had signed for. By the time we got to Blackman and Olsson I don't recall too many feeling comfortable with what was happening. It's not history by the way, I'm not re-writing anything, I'm just saying how I remember it.

Yeah. I remember thinking we always seemed to pay top whack. Could still remember Cloughie bargains!

[i-Ram]

21 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

Nope, we signed Butterfield for £4m and I recall reading little else than that he was bang average. Bradley Johnson for £6m was, as I recall, seen as a decent player but well over priced - though even that generosity was a bit lost as he didn't even know the name of the club he had signed for. By the time we got to Blackman and Olsson I don't recall too many feeling comfortable with what was happening. It's not history by the way, I'm not re-writing anything, I'm just saying how I remember it.

Hands up, I thought Johnson would be a good signing. He did have a few good games to be fair. £6m though, and I wonder how much we were paying him a week?

[atherstoneram]

2 hours ago, Bianoic said:

We encouraged him to do so 

Really, do you think owners listen to fans on who to buy, that is something that is brought to a conclusion between the manager,the recruitment team and the owner. MM chose to spend money of his own accord, he wasn't forced to spend it.

[BramcoteRam84]

GSE we’re running us responsibly and not spending money. This led to protests outside the ground and chants of sack the board!!!!!!!!! People criticising Mel for spending money is a bit like pot calling the kettle black.

Yes Mel could’ve spent the money more wisely but I have no issue with him spending the money and trying to show ambition. If all we are facing is sailing close to the wind on FFP I can live with that. What I struggle with is (or at least the growing perception is) he’s not dealing with the consequences of the overspending and ensuring that whatever happens he continues to fund the club, as he should given he’s the custodian. He can’t just walk away from his responsibilities, if he couldnt cover the shortfall he shouldn’t have spebt it.

We could all be wrong about this but we will see once accounts are filed if Mel is the blocker because he won’t guarantee to fund the club in the event of no takeover. It’s going to be an interesting couple of weeks and personally I hope many of us are eating humble pie at the end of it.

[strawhillram]

17 hours ago, Yani P said:

I'm still waiting for the Chinese..

Did you use deliverroo? I ordered a takeaway the other day and it only took 15 minutes

[1967RAMS]

9 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Can you give the breakdown and where you got the information from please?

You've stated a few times that you think administration is the best option but seem to have very little, if any, understanding of finances. 

Source?

Assets. Players who I doubt we will get more than say 10 million for

Liabilities HMRC debt, contracts to players and the massive amount of monies put in by MM which will sit as loans owed to him and the various companies controlled by him

These cannot just be written off, nor can a company “give” a stadium away that they paid 80 million for without serious HMRC investigation into possible fraudulent business transactions. Never said I have an answer as I doubt there is one, the only legal way to write down the debt is administration in my very limited knowledge of it . Happy for you to correct me on this if you have any better ideas

 

[G STAR RAM]

41 minutes ago, 1967RAMS said:

Assets. Players who I doubt we will get more than say 10 million for

Liabilities HMRC debt, contracts to players and the massive amount of monies put in by MM which will sit as loans owed to him and the various companies controlled by him

These cannot just be written off, nor can a company “give” a stadium away that they paid 80 million for without serious HMRC investigation into possible fraudulent business transactions. Never said I have an answer as I doubt there is one, the only legal way to write down the debt is administration in my very limited knowledge of it . Happy for you to correct me on this if you have any better ideas

Value of players is subjective but agree that we don't have much value on that front. Personally think we would be closer to £20m.

The HMRC debt, well we know there is one as it is listed as a reason for the EFL embargo, rumoured to be £20m but there is no information available in the public domain to back this up.

Contracts to players, yes they are a liability but also you need these contracts to be able to generate income.

As I have said on numerous occasions, as at 30 June 2018 (the latest accounts filed at Companies House) there is no debt to MM or any of his companies. The money has been put into the club via equity not debt.

MM may have monies owed from his other companies but that is not a debt of the club.

Not really sure what your point about giving the ground away is and to be honest it makes no sense.

If MM has a ground worth £80m and debts secured against it of £80m, the purchaser would pay £0 but it doesnt mean that the ground is being given away. No idea how you have concluded that HMRC would see that as fraudulent.

As far as I can see, the only debt we would eliminate by administration is the HMRC debt. Everything else appears to be secured against assets, so MM has nothing to gain by doing it and an awful lot to lose. He would lose the ground and see his club relegated to League One, would that make us an attractive proposition to any potential buyer?

[angieram]

11 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

I must have missed the 'Sign Jacob Butterfield now' banners. Indeed, I remember on that deadline day many on here and other places decrying it as lunacy. On the day, not five years later.

Okay, I have just been right through the Jacob Butterfield transfer thread. 59 pages. One poster @Carl Sagan called it out as a bad signing. Just one.

Two or three more thought the price was high but that he was a good player.

Rest were all saying he is class, we could sign who we wanted, we have the money, Rush/Morris are gods, that sort of stuff.

Someone said we should be signing better as Butterfield might not cut it in the Premier League when we got promoted at the end of the season! 

Many fans on the forum may have been changing their minds a few games into his Derby career, but it's just not true that they were doing it as he was signed. 

[G STAR RAM]

19 minutes ago, angieram said:

Okay, I have just been right through the Jacob Butterfield transfer thread. 59 pages. One poster @Carl Sagan called it out as a bad signing. Just one.

Two or three more thought the price was high but that he was a good player.

Rest were all saying he is class, we could sign who we wanted, we have the money, Rush/Morris are gods, that sort of stuff.

Someone said we should be signing better as Butterfield might not cut it in the Premier League when we got promoted at the end of the season! 

Many fans on the forum may have been changing their minds a few games into his Derby career, but it's just not true that they were doing it as he was signed. 

Well done @angieram, I started to do it last night and was going to copy the quotes but then I realised I couldn't be bothered!

Like I said, its a complete re-writing of history and its amazing how many people try it!

Its pretty much the same with the Bradley Johnson signing, from memory there was only @Bris Vegaswho thought it was a bad signing but within a year or two there were lots of people claiming to have called it out as a bad signing at the time.

I'll admit I thought Butterfield would be a good signing based on what I had been told about him at Barnsley and how he had performed for Huddersfield. I also Johnson would be a goal scoring midfielder for us, as he had been in Norwich promotion season, but he never really seemed to be played as such.

[Comrade 86]

14 hours ago, Rampage said:

Is this a termite mound. Asking for a friend.

No. It's a big, steaming pile of dinosaur poo.

[Crewton]

I think Mel once said words to the effect that "If a manager comes to me asking for help to improve the team, I do my best to give him that help". 

If he's made mistakes on spending, it's often because he's indulged his managers too readily and been let down by the people recommending those players and sometimes by the players themselves, who I believe carry the greatest responsibility for their own non-performance.

In hindsight, loans may have served us better, but at the time of signing Butters & Johnno, I can remember plenty saying they felt we'd paid a bit over the odds for them, but I don't remember many saying we shouldn't have bought them, at a time when it was unclear how long Hughes and Bryson would be out for. 

[BaaLocks]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Well done @angieram, I started to do it last night and was going to copy the quotes but then I realised I couldn't be bothered!

Like I said, its a complete re-writing of history and its amazing how many people try it!

Its pretty much the same with the Bradley Johnson signing, from memory there was only @Bris Vegaswho thought it was a bad signing but within a year or two there were lots of people claiming to have called it out as a bad signing at the time.

I'll admit I thought Butterfield would be a good signing based on what I had been told about him at Barnsley and how he had performed for Huddersfield. I also Johnson would be a goal scoring midfielder for us, as he had been in Norwich promotion season, but he never really seemed to be played as such.

Read what I write - not what you think you see. I said I am not trying to rewrite history but I stand by the point that many considered the price we paid for these players to be considerably more than they brought in terms of quality (hey, guess what, there's more to Derby County than the views on this forum). You need to have the intelligence to disconnect value from ability - as some others have said, Johnson and Butterfield looked good on paper, Bradley had the odd good game for us. But, even at the time, the sheer expense of those - plus others from Blackman to Anya - was questioned - that is not rewriting history, and I don't say it was universal (yes, you could post just as many Tweets saying they were great signings) but it was there.

[EulogyForEvolution]

For someone who has done very well in business, Mel Morris seems to have very little grasp of what you should get back from a bad investment. 

From a business point of view, he has ran this club into the ground. He has spent something ridiculous like £40 million plus on players who went on to leave for nothing since he has been in charge. He has done poor business when selling our players on (Will Hughes as an example). He sacked Richard Keogh for being a passenger in a car that crashed in a drink driving incident, which would have been fine if not for the fact that the players who were actually driving didn't face consequences. He has one of the worst records I have ever seen in football for hiring and firing managers. We have been a circus since he walked through the door.

He 'had the EFL on strings' and went to war with our governing body. A war which we were only ever going to lose with the 'creative accounting' he was trying to slip through. He has then been caught trying to flog us on to anyone who comes forward, regardless of how dodgy they appear to be, to the point where he was stitched up by a journalist pretending to represent ducking criminals wanting to use the club to launder money. 

Now he refuses to agree to fund the club if he cannot secure a sale, leaving us in an embargo with a management team of novices that he can't afford to sack and club morale at rock bottom. Everyone knows we can't compete this year. Everyone knows whose fault it is.

But yeah...hold out for the big bucks Mel ? I'm sure someone will come and bail you out. 

Just do the honourable thing and let the club go to someone decent who makes an offer. It's the least you can do at this point. You're not exactly going to run out of money and you will live the rest of your life in a level of opulent luxury most of us can only dream of, and that would still be the case if you let the club go for 20p and a Freddo.