Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[Ghost of Clough]

11 minutes ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

Which is why a straight line approach is preferred.  You depreciate the asset value over the duration of the contract and this method balances the good and bad.  Our approach assumed all were good signings and lost only a small amount of their value in the first few years.  
 

You’re right, the profit does go some way but only when it’s realised (e.g. Vydra).  You can’t allow for a profit on a potential sale as it doesn’t exist.  If we’d sold a lot of players for profit it wouldn’t be so bad but how often has that happened in the last 4/5 years?  And ultimately that’s the problem that led to the change in approach - too much money going out and not enough coming in.

Your argument falls apart because we let so many leave on a free.
How many players have we SOLD at a P&S loss? Weimann, Jerome, Albentosa, Shotton all about on par with what their book values would have been at the time. Profits on Ince, Christie and Vydra.

[Tyler Durden]

2 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

I agree that the change in amortisation policy was a misjudgement. But it wasn’t completely unreasonable when it coincided with a big investment in new players. If you invest £4million in a 23 year old why would you expect that amount to depreciate by 25% in the First year due to an artificial straight line hit.
 

of course if that player is Kamil Jozwiak that argument doesn’t look so strong.

the amortisation thing was bad judgement as were the signings that went with it. But I don’t believe it breaks any rules.

Does CharlotteRam have two accounts, sure that was against forum rules....

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

If we are still discussing the merits of which amortisation method should have been used can anyone confirm if the EFL rules stated all clubs had to use the same method or merely one that complied with HMRC? If its the latter then what we did is not the despicable cheating act some have painted. After all our accountants, the IDC accountant and presumably HMRC haven't claimed we cheated?  

[BaaLocks]

13 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

If we are still discussing the merits of which amortisation method should have been used can anyone confirm if the EFL rules stated all clubs had to use the same method or merely one that complied with HMRC? If its the latter then what we did is not the despicable cheating act some have painted. After all our accountants, the IDC accountant and presumably HMRC haven't claimed we cheated?  

I think you need to look at it the other way, if the method was validated (not just by the likes of HMRC but also by the EFL and it's members) then we wouldn't be we where we are now. We can get all "they've got it in for us" but I don't see how anyone could claim that a load of Chairmen are sitting in a room saying "let's shaft Derby, never liked them" and the post the other week suggests the EFL are actually going about this in anything but this manner. We didn't cheat, we tried to bend the rules beyond a reasonable level, we got caught - our only olive branch of compromise was that we got this signed off initially but our actions since the initial claim have left us bereft of sympathy.

And we are discussing the amortisation method because we are fans on a forum - for those it matters to this discussion closed a long, long time ago.

Edited November 8, 2021 by BaaLocks

[Oldben]

In my opinion, it's not about the efl shafting Derby, though they are making example of Derby but that's because they don't care what the club is, if the club dared to do something they as non qualified accountants did not approve of.

Derby made the efl look unprofessional because they did something there rules at the time did not cover, in terms of amortisation.

The efl want to make an example of any club that goes against there thought process.

The efl don't want a fair process or on the last appeal they would have appointed an accountant to the panel or better still have used an independent arbitrator for sport, maybe a fifa appointment review to assess the case.

 

 

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Woodley Ram said:

 

-15 is a big penalty, in fact it might as well be -50 as to overturn it we would need to produce play off type performances and we don’t have the team or squad to do that. -15 also gives us an issue in January, do we try and bringin players to fight to stay in the championship or prepare for League 1.

This - in my opinion 

[PistoldPete]

33 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Does CharlotteRam have two accounts, sure that was against forum rules....

Who is Charlotte Ram?

[Tyler Durden]

Just now, PistoldPete said:

Who is Charlotte Ram?

Nice try ?

[PistoldPete]

36 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

If we are still discussing the merits of which amortisation method should have been used can anyone confirm if the EFL rules stated all clubs had to use the same method or merely one that complied with HMRC? If its the latter then what we did is not the despicable cheating act some have painted. After all our accountants, the IDC accountant and presumably HMRC haven't claimed we cheated?  

Nor do the administrators (also accountants) I believe which is why they are still negotiating the penalty, hopefully downwards from what EFL would have liked.  

[PistoldPete]

2 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Nice try ?

You think she is me in drag?

[Ram-Alf]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Who is Charlotte Ram?

I believe she lives on the West Coast near Sea Scale, Her and Her Father cultivate small onions

[Ghost of Clough]

31 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Who is Charlotte Ram?

@Charlotte Ram

[PistoldPete]

4 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

@Charlotte Ram

Oh it's a he. We need to have those he/ him/his labels.

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, BaaLocks said:

I think you need to look at it the other way, if the method was validated (not just by the likes of HMRC but also by the EFL and it's members) then we wouldn't be we where we are now. We can get all "they've got it in for us" but I don't see how anyone could claim that a load of Chairmen are sitting in a room saying "let's shaft Derby, never liked them" and the post the other week suggests the EFL are actually going about this in anything but this manner. We didn't cheat, we tried to bend the rules beyond a reasonable level, we got caught - our only olive branch of compromise was that we got this signed off initially but our actions since the initial claim have left us bereft of sympathy.

And we are discussing the amortisation method because we are fans on a forum - for those it matters to this discussion closed a long, long time ago.

So why is the penalty for breaching FFP still unsettled?

[Comrade 86]

2 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

We’re down already. 

Ah, that legendary Bris positivity. How I've missed it ?

[RAM1966]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

Oh it's a he. We need to have those he/ him/his labels.

No we don't.... ?

 

[MuespachRam]

Just now, PistoldPete said:

So why is the penalty for breaching FFP still unsettled?

Do you really think digging through all our accounts is a simple matter.? 
they will be in a horrendous mess I suspect; with so many cover ups and loop holes in there. All thanks to one person. 

[kevinhectoring]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Oh it's a he. We need to have those he/ him/his labels.

Always assumed they might live in North Carolina 

[cosmic]

4 minutes ago, RAM1966 said:

No we don't.... ?

I agree with her. 

[LazloW]

6 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Ah, that legendary Bris positivity. How I've missed it ?

It’s not so much that what he says isn’t untrue, just the gusto and apparent pleasure he takes in saying it that rankles!