Players asked to defer wages

[ollycutts1982]

11 minutes ago, Crewton said:

If all of the recognised fans groups agree to waive that requirement, a takeover might be able to proceed more quickly. 

Here’s hoping. ??

[Malty]

32 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I could've sworn we had a squad of 23? 

I was kidding about a dozen. The point being there isn’t many.

[1967RAMS]

17 minutes ago, ollycutts1982 said:

Isn’t there a rule in place where there is a 28 day grace period for a fans consortium to put an offer in. I can’t see a takeover happening that soon. I suppose it depends how far the buyer who apparently pulled out last week was down the line, fit and proper test, proof of funds etc. 

Yes deffo a 28 day rule which is why I said takeover in 27. I don’t expect it either to be sorted that quickly but if a buyer is in place, it shouldn’t take long. Big IF though 

[Stive Pesley]

Hmm - deferred wages still have to be paid at some point, so doesn't this just increase the price again for any potential buyer?

"oh yeah - as well as the £25m you will have to pay the HMRC, and the millions to Keogh, Cocu, transfer fee installments etc - are you also OK to add on a couple of million for players wages during the time we were in administration?"

It's such an attractive proposition I can't believe we don't have a queue

 

[Kennington Ram]

I can see why they would ask it, although obviously it's not really a sustainable approach for long. It gives the administrators a bit of time to figure out if Mel's comments on trending towards a sustainable business model are true and convert to reality when they're responsible for revenues and outgoings. Good crowds for fixtures in this period may help.

[Tamworthram]

8 hours ago, Ambitious said:

I don’t like it. 

The players should be free to say no, without punishment. Some players can afford a deferral more than others.

If a life long Derby County fan with 100s of millions in the bank can’t be arsed to sacrifice for the club then why should the players?

I’m a Derby fan and I would be saying get me my money or allow me to walk. There is absolutely no certainty this deferral will ever be paid. Are we not just delaying the obvious? 

8 hours ago, Ambitious said:

I don’t like it. 

The players should be free to say no, without punishment. Some players can afford a deferral more than others.

If a life long Derby County fan with 100s of millions in the bank can’t be arsed to sacrifice for the club then why should the players?

I’m a Derby fan and I would be saying get me my money or allow me to walk. There is absolutely no certainty this deferral will ever be paid. Are we not just delaying the obvious? 

Out of interest, how do you think the players would be “punished” if they said no?

[jimtastic56]

IF the sun is right about a £3k cap on wages , Beilik will probably take the biggest hit. He is possibly on £20k-£30k a week. We all expected Keogh to take reduced wages while injured, so why not Beilik ? After all the new owners will have to square up with him and he will probably walk out at some point anyway.

[Crewton]

5 minutes ago, jimtastic56 said:

IF the sun is right about a £3k cap on wages , Beilik will probably take the biggest hit. He is possibly on £20k-£30k a week. We all expected Keogh to take reduced wages while injured, so why not Beilik ? After all the new owners will have to square up with him and he will probably walk out at some point anyway.

Bielik was injured doing his job ffs 

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, Rich84 said:

It may or may not happen, but does it look like the players don't want to play for WR and the Rams, as from my perspective this is the most together I can remember them, I doubt any would walk away.

Remember only last season Sheff Weds didn't pay for months yet none of their players walked.....

Also, there will be plenty on here that have been asked to take pay cuts or deferrals during the last 18 months due to cash flow, RR staff for starters, and these people don't tend to have the financial headroom the vast majority of footballers have.

Let's not panic just yet, surely this would be the 1st thing any administrator would do when trying to plot a path for a business with cash flow issues.

Plus lots of our players must still live at home with Mum & Dad?! ?

[richinspain]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Five of our players were free agents in the summer so not sure they would easily get paid £4500 per month elsewhere.

And all of them have done enough to suggest that they are worth at least that at another club (4500 per week)

[Rambalin]

34 minutes ago, 1967RAMS said:

Yes deffo a 28 day rule which is why I said takeover in 27. I don’t expect it either to be sorted that quickly but if a buyer is in place, it shouldn’t take long. Big IF though 

The 28 day rule can become zero days if the fan groups say they cannot raise the funds which would in our case would be a big help and quicken the process if there is a buyer 

[Gladram]

14 minutes ago, jimtastic56 said:

IF the sun is right about a £3k cap on wages , Beilik will probably take the biggest hit. He is possibly on £20k-£30k a week. We all expected Keogh to take reduced wages while injured, so why not Beilik ? After all the new owners will have to square up with him and he will probably walk out at some point anyway.

It didn't say there was a cap just that the players we signed this season would only get £3K. The other players would get 2/3rds of their normal salary.

[RoyMac5]

6 minutes ago, Gladram said:

It didn't say there was a cap just that the players we signed this season would only get £3K. The other players would get 2/3rds of their normal salary.

? Which is of course 2/3rds of £4.5k.

[uttoxram75]

We don't know if this is true yet. There will be plenty of clickbait articles over the next few weeks.

Anyrode, if it was true, we don't know if the EFL have run it past Kieran Maguire and Steve Gibson for approval yet.

[Malty]

I don’t get all this about a new buyer paying all the debts …. Maguire said 60m

- Mel more than likely won’t want his money immediately, I’m sure an arrangement can be made 

- if we negotiate with Hmrc we should be able to pay by instalments there too

- likewise with the efl of other clubs have a payback agreement with hmrc, why can’t we?

- in any takeover there is bound to be a re-financing of debt. It’s not unusual for a club to have debt secured against future revenue. People might not like it, but it does happen

- The reality is that Derby is much more appealing than people like Maguire is making out.

[Duracell]

There wisdom here is often "they can afford to, why don't they?" with this kind of thing. It's hard to reconcile with the fact that over half the squad earns in a fortnight what the average person takes him in a year with the fact that they may not want - or even be able - to defer their wages for long.

This argument assumes that all footballers live within their means, are not supporting a substantial network of wider family at home or abroad, and don't have a mortgage which takes a significant part of their salary. Our players would have made their financial decisions based on their wages for the length of their contract.

That's not to say we should feel sorry for them, or to say their situation is anywhere near as sticky as others. Just to highlight the fact that even a measure like this is wrapped up with human complications.

[atherstoneram]

1 hour ago, Eatonram said:

God I bet you love a good head ache. 

Why,am i supposed to feel sympathetic, it's not my fault the club is in this situation and the owner appears to be deserting what could be  a sinking ship. I don't think the players will be having to make use of a food bank,what about the small businesses who provide goods/services to the club, they probably haven't received a penny in months

[Sparkle]

No one knows if this is the case or not but I am sure the administrator will try it regardless

there is no way on earth there is a fans group can get anything near to what would be needed to take the club over so those administrators need to get the club sold exceptionally quickly  

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Rampant said:

Is Morris skint?

No. Far from it.

[jono]

2 hours ago, Rich84 said:

It may or may not happen, but does it look like the players don't want to play for WR and the Rams, as from my perspective this is the most together I can remember them, I doubt any would walk away.

Remember only last season Sheff Weds didn't pay for months yet none of their players walked.....

Also, there will be plenty on here that have been asked to take pay cuts or deferrals during the last 18 months due to cash flow, RR staff for starters, and these people don't tend to have the financial headroom the vast majority of footballers have.

Let's not panic just yet, surely this would be the 1st thing any administrator would do when trying to plot a path for a business with cash flow issues.

I disagree. I think the players do want to play for WR and the Rams. Our start to the season and the WBA game followed by the Stoke game show that very clearly. 

I was simply making the point that none payment of wages is a breach of contract so legally any player could walk and take his registration with him. It’s a potential gamble by the admins …. More possible point deductions AND losing a contested player with a financial value

of course the story could be gossip - we will find out in the next 7 days I guess !