Mel Morris interview on Radio Derby 1pm

[vonwright]

51 minutes ago, Spanish said:

Imo our amortisation policy was due solely to kicking the can down the road in the hope we could get promoted and avoid penalties

I agree, and in any case it feels like it barely matters any more whether it was 'technically compliant' or not. Like arguing whether we 'technically' met building regulations while the house crumbles to the ground.

If we don't find a buyer - and I really don't think we are an appealing prospect just now - we need to understand how serious this could be. 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2021 by vonwright

[Ramtastic ones]

11 minutes ago, Icomeinpeace said:

They do you're right - but where is the potential for profit? You have to take a  balanced look at any potential prospects. I'm not having a go here because I'm a red. I think my posts show I have no issues with Derby at all, but as we've said you're around +£30-60 million in immediate debt, and in administration so any funds the club do have will go to paying your creditors, you've already loaned against your physical assets so no chance to use them to raise funds, with the multiple points deductions you'll in all likelihood be playing in a lower league with even less TV money, potentially a lower gate and be less attractive to sponsors plus you have very few players (even saleable ones) and an embargo on transfers .... if you had a spare £40 million to spare to invest in a club in all honestly why would you use it to effectively just pay off the debt of Derby and have nothing to invest and be in that league and position when you could probably buy a team like Sunderland and use the funds to invest in straight away and get promotion rather than spend a few years just trying to get Derby back on an even keel. I really struggle to the upside for any potential owner - at least any reputable one.    

Most of my my best friends are trees or Leeds fans - I live in Lincolnshire - so no axe to to grind my red friend. ?

The potential for profit is in the fan base. How many teams in all divisions have the potential that we and several others in the championship and div one have?

The revenue potential is there.

 

 

 

 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

54 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

The more I think about it, the less credible it seems the administration can possibly be anything other than Mel is fed of paying and isn't going to do it any more.

 

He doesn't want to sell the club for cash in his account but doesn't want to pay debt accrued whilst here, He should pay the lot including the any HMRC liability and loans associated with the stadium.  Should he then wish to sell or lease the stadium back to a new owner, deal with that then. I assume that's not in his remit hence the unnecessary administration.  The sponsorship and gate receipts from the current season is more than enough to cover the clubs outgoings for this year and in perpetuity with the right balance.  I'm still not seeing where this figure of 26 million to HMRC has come from . Must have missed it somewhere.  I know they do a name and shame now which seems alien to me but there you go. Was it on there?

[Icomeinpeace]

12 minutes ago, Ramtastic ones said:

Most of my my best friends are trees or Leeds fans - I live in Lincolnshire - so no axe to to grind my red friend. ?

The potential for profit is in the fan base. How many teams in all divisions have the potential that we and several others in the championship and div one have?

The revenue potential is there.

 

 

 

 

I love the optimism but the reality is that clubs - in the top divisions at least - long since stopped being able to fund operations from the fans directly i.e gate receipts, merch and match day activity. Look at a club like Arsenal - turnover of £403m  in 2018 - gate and match income £99m.  And that's when they can rely on a full stadium and decent return on away support. They got twice that income from TV rights. Brighton - £139m turnover - match income £19m (TV money £110m).... Burnley turnover 139million, match income just 6million, TV money 122m. So Derby without any real TV money in league 1..... sorry I'll stop it now as it really is depressing. 

 

  

Edited September 19, 2021 by Icomeinpeace

[Mckram]

43 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

So if it hadn’t been for COVID we wouldn’t have been placed into administration? 
Then why are half of the Championship clubs most of which haven’t benefited from parachute payments, still trading. This includes small clubs such as Brentford, Boro and Notts Forest. 
Brentford even got promoted!

Well I think Brentford had less turnover before, so covid will have not hit them as hard. They also got promoted as you said, so Prem money will save them for many years to come.

Boro sold their debts to Gibson and will have also got the covid bailout money of £8m. They will have had parachute payments until 2020 and don’t forget it’s only 2/3 years ago they sold Traore, Gibson and Bamford for a combined £40m.

Forest will have got the covid bailout money of £8m and also sold Cash for £15m in 2020. So there’s £23m more than us immediately. I bet they’re probably next worst off though.

I think the only real money we’ve had in has been Bogle/Lowe over the last couple of years and that’s peanuts. Also no bailout money.

I don’t buy it’s all down to covid as I think he’s skint/fed up of losing his money, but we have easily been hit the hardest out of any other team in the league.  

 

[Red Ram]

2 minutes ago, Mckram said:

Well I think Brentford had less turnover before, so covid will have not hit them as hard. They also got promoted as you said, so Prem money will save them for many years to come.

Boro sold their debts to Gibson and will have also got the covid bailout money of £8m. They will have had parachute payments until 2020 and don’t forget it’s only 2/3 years ago they sold Traore, Gibson and Bamford for a combined £40m.

Forest will have got the covid bailout money of £8m and also sold Cash for £15m in 2020. So there’s £23m more than us immediately. I bet they’re probably next worst off though.

I think the only real money we’ve had in has been Bogle/Lowe over the last couple of years and that’s peanuts. Also no bailout money.

I don’t buy it’s all down to covid as I think he’s skint/fed up of losing his money, but we have easily been hit the hardest out of any other team in the league.  

 

 

[Rev]

1 hour ago, Ramtastic ones said:

I'll now to your greater knowledge. EFL rule or accountancy rule. If the latter, with regards tangible assets which players and shares are (I think) then how can the EFL apply a rule that doesn't apply in every other business model.

You don't buy the player, the transfer fee and agents commission give the club the right to use that player over the term of their contract. 

This is a good run through.

https://www.rsm.global/indonesia/en/insights/articles/football-stars-intangible-assets

 

[ram59]

1 hour ago, Abu Derby said:

So if it hadn’t been for COVID we wouldn’t have been placed into administration? 
Then why are half of the Championship clubs most of which haven’t benefited from parachute payments, still trading. This includes small clubs such as Brentford, Boro and Notts Forest. 
Brentford even got promoted!

It's probably true, the covid losses of £20M are the straw that broke the camel's back.

Put it like this, of you had given the club a sudden cash injection of £20M last, do you think that we'd still be going into administration at this time?

You could also say, if we hadn't have bought Butterfield and Johnson and was given that money back, would we be going into administration?

Non of these issues are solely to blame, but together, they all add up.

[Crewton]

18 minutes ago, Icomeinpeace said:

I love the optimism but the reality is that clubs - in the top divisions at least - long since stopped being able to fund operations from the fans directly i.e gate receipts, merch and match day activity. Look at a club like Arsenal - turnover of £403m  in 2018 - gate and match income £99m.  And that's when they can rely on a full stadium and decent return on away support. They got twice that income from TV rights. Brighton - £139m turnover - match income £19m (TV money £110m).... Burnley turnover 139million, match income just 6million, TV money 122m. So Derby without any real TV money in league 1..... sorry I'll stop it now as it really is depressing. 

 

  

The drop in solidarity payments from Championship to L1 is around £4M. If we're lucky, a team like Derby get perhaps £600-700K from live TV games. So that's a drop in total "Sky" money of about £5M. 

That's substantial for a team like Wycombe, but for a team with a much bigger fanbase, with reasonable prospects of averaging 18K in L1, it's not catastrophic provided other costs are under control.

[Ghost of Clough]

32 minutes ago, Icomeinpeace said:

I love the optimism but the reality is that clubs - in the top divisions at least - long since stopped being able to fund operations from the fans directly i.e gate receipts, merch and match day activity. Look at a club like Arsenal - turnover of £403m  in 2018 - gate and match income £99m.  And that's when they can rely on a full stadium and decent return on away support. They got twice that income from TV rights. Brighton - £139m turnover - match income £19m (TV money £110m).... Burnley turnover 139million, match income just 6million, TV money 122m. So Derby without any real TV money in league 1..... sorry I'll stop it now as it really is depressing. 

Derby with zero 'TV money' is still over £21m in a normal season. Which would still be about 35th highest in the country.

[i-Ram]

Three classic comments from the interview:

1) My putting the Club into Adminstration gives it a better chance of finding a Purchaser it desperately needs. Mmmh. Really not sure it does Mel. Let’s be honest it is much more the case that you are simply not prepared to put any more money into the club, notwithstanding you are still comfortably in the top 500 richest people in the UK.

2) No one can continue to put money into the club (£3m pm, down to £1.5m pm more recently) in perpetuity. Mmmh. I wonder who created the income/expenditure imbalance and indebtedness? Any ideas Mel?

3) I’ve been prepared to sell the club for £15m less than I bought it for. Mmmh. Did the club have a Stadium and a decent team when you bought it Mel?

I have had little time for this guy since around 2016, and today he confirmed all my worst fears.

Edited September 20, 2021 by GboroRam
Amended to remove mild offensiveness

[Ramtastic ones]

33 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Derby with zero 'TV money' is still over £21m in a normal season. Which would still be about 35th highest in the country.

Thank you. My point is made.

 

[RAM1966]

10 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

I think MSD has security over the stadium. 

Think again Mel last weeks settled the loan against the stadium, check with companies house!  That is the only DCFC related company that wasn't placed into Administration.   I think this could be one of the following reasons:

1.  He wants to have a say with the administrators who takes over at the club and he's holding the ground back to ensure he can do!  

2.  He wants to sell it for as much as possible to re-coupe some of his losses.

3.  He wants to lease it back to DCFC so he can get his money back over a longer period of time.

Essentially however you look at it, it appears that Mel will still be calling the shots to a certain degree as he has a circa £80M asset that really should belong to the club.

I really hope he's not a complete ?end over this as he could end up putting the club out of business...........

Edited September 20, 2021 by RAM1966

[Red Ram]

13 hours ago, i-Ram said:

Three classic comments from the interview:

1) My putting the Club into Adminstration gives it a better chance of finding a Purchaser it desperately needs. Mmmh. Really not sure it does Mel. Let’s be honest it is much more the case that you are simply not prepared to put any more money into the club, notwithstanding you are still comfortably in the top 500 richest people in the UK.

2) No one can continue to put money into the club (£3m pm, down to £1.5m pm more recently) in perpetuity. Mmmh. I wonder who created the income/expenditure imbalance and indebtedness? Any ideas Mel?

3) I’ve been prepared to sell the club for £15m less than I bought it for. Mmmh. Did the club have a Stadium and a decent team when you bought it Mel?

I have had little time for this guy since around 2016, and today he confirmed all my worst fears.

What struck me was how Mel said he didn't regret taking over the club because he'd 'rather have tried and failed' than not tried at all.  So that's alright then - he's managed to tick an item off on his bucket list even though it hasn't worked out the way he hoped it would.

It seemed an incredibly egocentric response to the question in the circumstances. All about the how it affected Mel Morris and no reference to the impact on the club's employees who would still have a job if Mel hadn't gambled with the future of the club by tripling the wage bill.  He just doesn't seem to have fully grasped the fact that he's put the very existence of the club itself at risk, trying to pretend that administration as being "in the best interests of the club etc. 

Put that together with the fact that he didn't even bother to let Rooney and the players know what was about to happen and a pretty clear picture of his character starts to emerge.

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by Boycie
As per quoted post

[sunnyhill60]

1 hour ago, Red Ram said:

What struck me was how Mel said he didn't regret taking over the club because he'd 'rather have tried and failed' than not tried at all.  So that's alright then - he's managed to tick an item off on his bucket list even though it hasn't worked out the way he hoped it would.

It seemed an incredibly egocentric response to the question in the circumstances. All about the how it affected Mel Morris and no reference to the impact on the club's employees who would still have a job if Mel hadn't gambled with the future of the club by tripling the wage bill.  He just doesn't seem to have fully grasped the fact that he's put the very existence of the club itself at risk, trying to pretend that administration as being "in the best interests of the club etc. 

Put that together with the fact that he didn't even bother to let Rooney and the players know what was about to happen and a pretty clear picture of his character starts to emerge.

 

As you assert, Morris has awareness only for himself and not the club, the fans or Rooney. If Wayne were to resign the situation of the club worsens dramatically. It has to be a priority to ensure he knows how much fans appreciate what he has done and that we will back him in whatever way we can.

[CornwallRam]

3 hours ago, RAM1966 said:

Think again Mel last weeks settled the loan against the stadium, check with companies house!  That is the only DCFC related company that wasn't placed into Administration.   I think this could be one of the following reasons:

1.  He wants to have a say with the administrators who takes over at the club and he's holding the ground back to ensure he can do!  

2.  He wants to sell it for as much as possible to re-coupe some of his losses.

3.  He wants to lease it back to DCFC so he can get his money back over a longer period of time.

Essentially however you look at it, it appears that Mel will still be calling the shots to a certain degree as he has a circa £80M asset that really should belong to the club.

I really hope he's not a complete ?end over this as he could end up putting the club out of business...........

I wonder if you are conflating the Barclays charge and the MSD one?

Apologies if you have more upto date information, but the MSD charge is currently showing as active.

[Ramtastic ones]

5 hours ago, Icomeinpeace said:

I love the optimism but the reality is that clubs - in the top divisions at least - long since stopped being able to fund operations from the fans directly i.e gate receipts, merch and match day activity. Look at a club like Arsenal - turnover of £403m  in 2018 - gate and match income £99m.  And that's when they can rely on a full stadium and decent return on away support. They got twice that income from TV rights. Brighton - £139m turnover - match income £19m (TV money £110m).... Burnley turnover 139million, match income just 6million, TV money 122m. So Derby without any real TV money in league 1..... sorry I'll stop it now as it really is depressing. 

 

  

So when did I say that there was a single item "silver bullet" fixes it? I didn't did I.

 

 

 

 

[ColonelBlimp]

This alleged 60million debt.

Would any new owners have to pay it in full or is there scope for 'arrangements '?

[G STAR RAM]

7 hours ago, atherstoneram said:

You know why the EFL didn't give us the loan,how many more times do you need to keep bringing it up

Because we were behind on payments to HMRC, so they thought we didn't qualify for a loan specifically meant to help clear liabilties to HMRC. 

Are you struggling to see the irony? Or are you just an 'EFL lover'?

[Spanish]

8 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

You will have noted that he said a model of 25,000 player sales showed the straight line amortisation was not appropriate.

He bought the stadium in 2018, not during Covid 

I dont think he ever indicated this, just that the players wages would be covered by insurance 

Nothing to stop you making a loan to the club either was there?

See above comment. My gripe was always over the valuation given to individual players but I believe the model is more suitable than straight line and is fully compliant with FRS is applied correctly, something that our auditors concluded we had done.

There must have been records available for the auditors.

Where do you have this information from?

What is our actual experience of player values throughout their contracts?  Dont care about 25000 others.  It was reckless to pitch all the PS losses into the final year

I don’t know about the stadium repayments because we haven’t seen accounts, I am just stating a possibility and you know that.