Mel Morris interview on Radio Derby 1pm

[Spanish]

1 minute ago, Norman said:

I'm sure Mel read this message board before singing the likes of Bradley Johnson. 

I mean, it's not like he has stated himself that we learned he was available at the very last minute on transfer deadline day and just went for it. No plan, no process. 

Must have been all the pesky people on here demanding it. 

i loved what he said about amortisation, did the work and established that most players do not lose their value in a straightline basis.  We bought senior players and our experience under his tenure is their value depreciated in a vertical straight line.  Businesses should use amortisation based on their corporate knowledge and experience.  What we chose was something that would crucify us in the last year of contracts because to do it any other way would have breached P&S

[atherstoneram]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

Id be surprised if we ran up in excess of £20m debt pre Covid.

That's just your assumption

[CornwallRam]

11 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

They are not counted 

They might be, depending where Mel is getting his information from.

If he's going from the accounts, the P&Ls will include them and show losses at a greater level than the P&S outcome.

However, if Mel is getting his information directly about P&S (is this actually published anywhere? Although owners may well get extra info anyway) then they aren't included.

[Spanish]

2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Id be surprised if we ran up in excess of £20m debt pre Covid.

in covid he bought the stadium and may have used the debt to counter the funding.  We don't know because the accounts have been ate by his dog

[Crewton]

47 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Because the valuation was found to be fair. 

There would be absolutely no reason for the EFL to investigate if we bought the ground back for a lower price.

It would be like investigating teams for buying players for less than they are worth.

If Derby ever managed to buy a player for less than they were worth the EFL would DEFINITELY investigate, because who would believe it possible?

[Spanish]

1 minute ago, CornwallRam said:

They might be, depending where Mel is getting his information from.

If he's going from the accounts, the P&Ls will include them and show losses at a greater level than the P&S outcome.

However, if Mel is getting his information directly about P&S (is this actually published anywhere? Although owners may well get extra info anyway) then they aren't included.

P&S comes from the annual summary provided to EFL, we don't get to see it.  Even when you eventually see the accounts it can be difficult to analyse because it may straddle a number of different companies.

[Miggins]

3 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Lol.

We have heard most of his excuses before. Only the Covid ones are new. I'll read Nicholson's mostly verbatim write up thanks.

I thought it was a good interview, Roy.  I listened to it with an open mind and there are excuses and there are reasons. Did you listen to it and what did you think? I would honestly like to hear your opinion as I enjoy reading your posts and broadly agree with your views. ?

[CornwallRam]

8 minutes ago, jono said:

Well perhaps you should. I see nothing weak in noting that empty vessels make the most noise. I was pretty sure at the time that the Butterfield / Johnson purchase was skewed and the later Chris Martin long contract seemed at odds with FFP but assumed the pro finance people knew what they were doing. Mel failed on that score .. big time. They were his people. He deserves criticism and vilification but a heck of a lot of folk didn’t care at the time  ., they were greatful that Mel had seemingly deep pockets and cheered to the rafters. I haven’t the will to sift through 4 years of posts … but they know who they are ! And I’d bet some of them are crucifying Mel right now. 

At the time, Mel indicated that the Butterfield and Johnson purchases were funded by insurance on Hughes and Bryson. There were lots of questions, but we never did get any details. Given that spin, it's hardly surprising that most fans were impressed. Mel appeared both ambitious and prudent.

[Sparkle]

1 hour ago, Woodypecker said:

We didn't qualify for the £8.3m because the club was in embargo for breach or suspected breach of EFL rules & regulations.

Yet the money is designed to pay the taxman and now it can’t - utterly ridiculous as this is the exact reason it was offered

[atherstoneram]

1 minute ago, Sparkle said:

Yet the money is designed to pay the taxman and now it can’t - utterly ridiculous as this is the exact reason it was offered

There was nothing to stop MM making a loan to the club out of his own pocket once he realised we didn't qualify for the loan from the EFL

[RoyMac5]

6 minutes ago, Miggins said:

I thought it was a good interview, Roy.  I listened to it with an open mind and there are excuses and there are reasons. Did you listen to it and what did you think? I would honestly like to hear your opinion as I enjoy reading your posts and broadly agree with your views. ?

I didn't listen because we've heard nearly all of it before in one form or another. As has been said the questions I might want answers to he won't give or doesn't have. 

What did he say that reassured you about the future of our club?

Edited September 19, 2021 by RoyMac5

[Eatonram]

Any idea as to whether season tickets will be honoured? 

[Miggins]

3 hours ago, Zag zig said:

I’m very similar, but his communication like his judgement on backing managers in the transfer market has been poor.

Forget the last hour and look at how we arrived at where we are at, most of the time with the fans in the dark.

Ed’s question about seeking the limelight was skirted around, on the basis certain managers bought more profile; not doubting that Lampard and Rooney have commercial advantages but he never came across as genuine in his answer to that, Mel enjoyed the limelight when things were positive in my opinion but has hidden with our backs against the wall.

He may end up losing a lot of money, but running football clubs is for the most part vanity projects, very few make money out of it. It’s the ordinary workforce my sadness is for, Mel’s acknowledgement of their plight was painfully extracted in that interview. 

Bar what he did for the academy, I think his legacy is horrendous, to put us in a perilously dire state should a buyer not be found soon.

Ed asked him about the appointment of high profile managers and he said it was great to work with them. He said that although it was a big financial bargain it helped to raise the profile of the club. It lifted the club and gave it more visibility. They got a good payment for the sale of Gary Rowett to Stoke and a good payment for Frank Lampard when he left for Chelsea and the sponsorship deal help to cover Wayne Rooney. Mel thought it was important to raise the profile of the club. He said that these appointments were only ever to raise the profile of the club.

[Miggins]

3 hours ago, IlsonDerby said:

May have interpreted it differently to some but to me it sounded like he was keeping the stadium to ensure it was safe from the admin process? 

Interesting, @IlsonDerby. The whole thing is so complicated and there is so much we don't know.

[Miggins]

23 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I didn't listen because we've heard nearly all of it before in one form or another. As has been said the questions I might want answers to he won't give or doesn't have. 

What did he say that reassured you about the future of our club?

Sorry Roy, but I can't say anymore than female intuition and don't you dare under estimate it!! It's a powerful tool. Seriously.

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

19 minutes ago, Miggins said:

Ed asked him about the appointment of high profile managers and he said it was great to work with them. He said that although it was a big financial bargain it helped to raise the profile of the club. It lifted the club and gave it more visibility. They got a good payment for the sale of Gary Rowett to Stoke and a good payment for Frank Lampard when he left for Chelsea and the sponsorship deal help to cover Wayne Rooney. Mel thought it was important to raise the profile of the club. He said that these appointments were only ever to raise the profile of the club.

I’d rather have a manager that would have been better at getting us promotion. 

[QuitYourJibbaJivin]

22 minutes ago, Eatonram said:

Any idea as to whether season tickets will be honoured? 

Why wouldn’t they be? Is that even a thing? If we’re able to fulfil our fixtures, tickets will be valid surely.

[ram59]

15 minutes ago, Spanish said:

i loved what he said about amortisation, did the work and established that most players do not lose their value in a straightline basis.  We bought senior players and our experience under his tenure is their value depreciated in a vertical straight line.  Businesses should use amortisation based on their corporate knowledge and experience.  What we chose was something that would crucify us in the last year of contracts because to do it any other way would have breached P&S

Yes, it is correct what he said about player values dropping mainly in the last year of their contract and I don't see that it is illegal to do the amortisation in this way. Derby used this method in the belief that when the final year of these players' contracts were due, we would be in the premier league and then it wouldn't matter,  one of a number of gambles which didn't pay off. 

He also tried to justify Lampard's team's wages by saying that Rowett's compensation nearly covered their first season costs, but they were on 3 year contracts, how would we have covered the other 2 years?

Ultimately, he is responsible for what has happened to the club, he has taken gambles which haven't paid off. He and Derby have been unlucky on a number of occasions over the years with a number of events contributing to the current situation. Who knows, had Zamora not scored that goal, Hughes and Bryson got injured, Newcastle, Stoke and Chelsea not sacked their managers, EFL deciding our amortisation policy was wrong years later, EFL questioning the value of the ground, Lampard picking a different team against villa and finally the big one covid, we may have got away with it.

He probably thought that as it was his money, he was entitled to take the gamble. But unfortunately it isn't that simple and the reputation and status of the club are now in question.

[RoyMac5]

Just now, Miggins said:

Sorry Roy, but I can't say anymore than female intuition and don't you dare under estimate it!! It's a powerful tool. Seriously.

Intuition is an interesting subject. But in this case I'd prefer facts - is the stadium and training ground to be part of any deal or will you be leasing them to the new owners? Why didn't you settle a points deduction with EFL, accept their offer? Or why didn't you submit the late accounts and P&S?

[Crewton]

3 hours ago, Icomeinpeace said:

re buyers- the thing to consider is that as DCFC doesn't own the stadium of the training ground either I believe, the club's only assets are the players - so not much. Plus your debt is around £37 Million as its 26 Million to HMRC, 6 Million in transfer fees and 5 Million roughly to Cocu and his staff. So any new buyer is looking at buying a club and paying off those debts, when they only get the players for it .... and you'll probably be in League 21 after a +20 points deduction .... seriously guys, good luck.

That's a reasonable analysis, and the lack of fixed assets would be an issue that potential buyers would, I presume, want to reach some agreement on with the owners of the stadium and training ground. In some respects, however, it may be an advantage in negotiations with HMRC, since were they to push for liquidation, they'd recoup very little : doing a deal in a CVA that recouped even a fifth of that debt, with a buyer who can give guarantees of paying millions of PAYE and VAT  every year is a more attractive option than removing a football club from the face of the earth and leaving a void producing no revenues for them at all.

Not that I'm suggesting HMRC are likely to think logically in that way (nor that liquidation isn't indeed a very real possibility), it's just that, unlike Banks, they have no interest in putting clubs out of business for the fun of it if a viable business model can be created.