Mel Morris interview on Radio Derby 1pm

[G STAR RAM]

16 minutes ago, Spanish said:

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

Our experience now, with the benefit of hindsight, is that we lost a lot of money on average players.

When we signed them, would you have predicted that Johnson, Butterfield, Wisdom would all leave for £0?

That is where accounting estimate come into play.

Not sure what you see as reckless? The hit to P&S was exactly the same no matter which method was used and I've seen nothing to suggest all of the losses were pitched into the final year, have you?

[Chester40]

21 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Our experience now, with the benefit of hindsight, is that we lost a lot of money on average players.

When we signed them, would you have predicted that Johnson, Butterfield, Wisdom would all leave for £0?

That is where accounting estimate come into play.

Not sure what you see as reckless? The hit to P&S was exactly the same no matter which method was used and I've seen nothing to suggest all of the losses were pitched into the final year, have you?

You raise an interesting question...was Mel's plan every bit as inherently flawed as Erik's? Gamble for promotion and hope we get the Sky cash. All Covid, EFL, amortisation excuses aside..the numbers don't add up and having gambled and lost he's pulling the plug and dumping us on the roadside. 

[angieram]

If you can't keep the personal insults or libellous comments out of your posts, then all the other good stuff you've written alongside them goes. Similarly if you quote posts which contain personal insults or libellous comments. 

Criticise all you want, but keep to Forum rules please.

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, ColonelBlimp said:

This alleged 60million debt.

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

Anyone has still yet to explain where this figure of £60m is coming from?

[Raich Carter]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Anyone has still yet to explain where this figure of £60m is coming from?

It might be one of those things that someone mentioned in passing as an example that became a de facto 'fact'.

We understand there's £27m owed to HMRC and £6m in transfer fees (£33m). Obviously the stadium was valued at £80m but realistically that's surely going to be more like £30m in real terms... if Mel is true to his word about effectively writing off his investment and helping new owners. Then there's the MSD money which I'm not sure is actually for but it's around £9m I think (could be wrong) so that's circa £70m and I'm sure there are more skeletons in closets so it feels like the £60m is actually low-balling it.

[AndyinLiverpool]

9 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Where are you getting the figure of £60m from?

Sorry, it was meant as a direct reply to someone who suggested that figure. 

I must have not pressed the quote button.

[Crewton]

I don't think there's any debt relating to the stadium sitting in DCFC Ltd - the club sold it to another unconnected company. If anything, I suspect that they're owed money from the sale. 

[CornwallRam]

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Anyone has still yet to explain where this figure of £60m is coming from?

All speculative, but John Percy claimed £26m to HMRC. Last figure to MSD was £17.5m, but the club statement insinuated more since.  Less than £8m to Cocu and his team and £2m or so to Keogh.

So maybe 26+20+6+2=54

We also know that we still owed an instalment for Beilik last month, so possible we still owe more, similar with Jozwiak presumably. Maybe still owe Sam Rush?

I think £60m looks at least plausible. 

[Crewton]

No doubt we'll find out in due course who still owes us installments for outgoing transfers to hopefully balance that £6m figure a little. 

[G STAR RAM]

6 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

All speculative, but John Percy claimed £26m to HMRC. Last figure to MSD was £17.5m, but the club statement insinuated more since.  Less than £8m to Cocu and his team and £2m or so to Keogh.

So maybe 26+20+6+2=54

We also know that we still owed an instalment for Beilik last month, so possible we still owe more, similar with Jozwiak presumably. Maybe still owe Sam Rush?

I think £60m looks at least plausible. 

But the MSD loan is in the company that owns the ground?

If MM is not selling the ground then surely he would not expect someone to clear the loan secured against it?

[atherstoneram]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

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'?

Because we were behind on payments to HMRC is the correct answer,other clubs must have been managing OK and not owing HMRC or at least making payments. We got behind before Covid struck so why should they give us a loan if MM couldn't keep up with payments before Covid. They probably thought he couldn't be trusted to use the loan what it was meant for,i mean he has a track record of defaulting on payments.You can keep asking the same question all day long but however many times you ask the answer will still be the same,why don't you contact the EFL and ask them,if you keep asking them the same question who knows they might change their minds

As for the other comment now who is making themselves look really silly,I am nowhere near an EFL lover, it's not my fault MM has failed massively nor indeed is it the EFL's fault as far as it goes. Anyone would think you have been brainwashed.

[CornwallRam]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

But the MSD loan is in the company that owns the ground?

If MM is not selling the ground then surely he would not expect someone to clear the loan secured against it?

I'm not sure we know that though, without accounts. The charge isn't just limited to the stadium. 

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Because we were behind on payments to HMRC is the correct answer,other clubs must have been managing OK and not owing HMRC or at least making payments. We got behind before Covid struck so why should they give us a loan if MM couldn't keep up with payments before Covid. They probably thought he couldn't be trusted to use the loan what it was meant for,i mean he has a track record of defaulting on payments.You can keep asking the same question all day long but however many times you ask the answer will still be the same,why don't you contact the EFL and ask them,if you keep asking them the same question who knows they might change their minds

As for the other comment now who is making themselves look really silly,I am nowhere near an EFL lover, it's not my fault MM has failed massively nor indeed is it the EFL's fault as far as it goes. Anyone would think you have been brainwashed.

Can I see your evidence that we were behind on HMRC payments before Covid?

The EFL could have always paid the £8.3m direct to HMRC but I am guessing that would hace been way too difficult for them to work out for themselves.

If you read what I say, you will see that I say the buck stops with MM and he should do the honorable thing and clear all debts acrrued during his tenure, not quite sure how that makes me brainwashed?

I'm glad that you agree that calling someone a ........... lover makes them look silly ?

[Ramos]

14 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

All speculative, but John Percy claimed £26m to HMRC. Last figure to MSD was £17.5m, but the club statement insinuated more since.  Less than £8m to Cocu and his team and £2m or so to Keogh.

So maybe 26+20+6+2=54

We also know that we still owed an instalment for Beilik last month, so possible we still owe more, similar with Jozwiak presumably. Maybe still owe Sam Rush?

I think £60m looks at least plausible. 

Am I the only one who remembers the club stating cocu had agreed not to take his pay (or take it reduced?) or was that a classic case of what someone mentioned above, where something gets said and then it’s passed on as fact? Or is this 4M or so the reduced version as stated at the time? 
 

Or is all this just a BAD DREAM?! 

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

I'm not sure we know that though, without accounts. The charge isn't just limited to the stadium. 

I'm pretty sure the charge is registered in the name of the Gellaw company with a charge over all of the football club assets, will look further into this when I have chance. 

[ketteringram]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

Can I see your evidence that we were behind on HMRC payments before Covid?

The EFL could have always paid the £8.3m direct to HMRC but I am guessing that would hace been way too difficult for them to work out for themselves.

If you read what I say, you will see that I say the buck stops with MM and he should do the honorable thing and clear all debts acrrued during his tenure, not quite sure how that makes me brainwashed?

I'm glad that you agree that calling someone a ........... lover makes them look silly ?

It isn't the EFL's job to pay debts the club have run up.

[Spanish]

9 hours 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.

well players are intangible assets I think

[Crewton]

1 minute ago, CornwallRam said:

I'm not sure we know that though, without accounts. The charge isn't just limited to the stadium. 

It is relevant, because that charge over the club will have to be removed in order for any transaction to go through - no new owner is going to accept a charge over their business for a loan that was taken out by an entity over which they have no control. It'll be up to Mel to sort that out with MSD, though that might have some influence over the price or conditions he will be looking for in the sale transaction. 

[Van der MoodHoover]

On the debt, whatever the number, there are a load of minute rules around repayment. 

Generally, it seems that there are minimum thresholds of offers we have to make (35p in the pound for hmrc I think is one example) and have maximum periods over which to clear the debts. 

Plus, we cannot continue to weaken the position for creditors ie by continuing being cashflow negative. 

If we fail any of those tests we face the prospect of liquidation. 

[Stive Pesley]

1 minute ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

If we fail any of those tests we face the prospect of liquidation. 

After the interview yesterday I'm now genuinely concerned about the club folding

When news broke about administration I figured it was  a tactical move (which is the line MM was pushing in the interview) - but it's dawning on me that all he has done in the last 6 years is make bad decision after bad decision, whilst telling everyone that he's making good decisions. I could list them all but it's too depressing