Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[PistoldPete]

26 minutes ago, sage said:

Not selling Lawrence at the start of his last year of contract when he accounts for 12% of our players wage bill is insane, bearing in mind we went  into administration weeks later.  

I would have sold him if we had a decent offer.  Not sure we did or that it would have prevented admin even if we had.

[sage]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

I would have sold him if we had a decent offer.  Not sure we did or that it would have prevented admin even if we had.

If we did receive that offer, selling him and Buchanan would have just about kept us going until November then you are close to the window.  

[Crewton]

9 minutes ago, sage said:

My comment was based on another posters comment on a bid of £1m. If we turned that down and went into admin weeks later then that is financially reckless and the kind of thing that could see our appeal thrown out.  

We certainly turned down £2m for Buchanan when we had 2 other left backs. We did that 2 to 3 weeks before going into admin. 

The last bid for Buchanan was reported as an initial £1.35M  - even if all paid upfront (which would be unusual) that wouldn;t have got us through another month of wages. Even if a £1M bid for Lawrence WAS received (and there were no reports of an actual bid being submitted), that wouldn't have made any difference either. With Morris withdrawing ongoing funding support, in all likelihood we needed something north of £10M just to get us through the season. 

In my view, those rejected "bids" are a red herring.

[i-Ram]

40 minutes ago, sage said:

Not selling Lawrence at the start of his last year of contract when he accounts for 12% of our players wage bill is insane, bearing in mind we went  into administration weeks later.  

I like, and am intrigued, by your precision. What is Lawrence’s salary, and the Club’s wage bill, and where have your figures come from?  Hard to believe from me I know, but this is a genuine question.

[NottsRammy]

18 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

To be honest I think we might get the 12 points reduced to -6 and it makes a bit of sense to do so.

-The EFL get to keep the -9 + the 3 suspended which is the strong punishment and waives off Wycombe and Boro from further action against Derby or the EFL.

-If we get it deduced to -6 then we just about remain competitive in the league, we have something to play for.

I’m not basing it on anything, but it is the cleanest solution to which everyone can then move on.

Exactly what ive said but you never know it might be 0 for administration waived away under covid . A one time excuse for the efl if they want to keep us in league and keep gibbo happy . 

[Ghost of Clough]

43 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

Was the combined total of bids enough to “see us through to the point where we avoid administration”?

It's not just those to non-sales though. It's also recruiting players and not offering other players out to clubs which compound the issue.

In my opinion, the appeal will come down to whether we did all we could to avoid administration despite Covid. Given the club's statement, I'll assume a self-sustainable model from next season. Our transfer activity over the past two summers would suggest to me we could have done more. The Covid impact was £20m. Could we have made up that amount from sales, not signing players for fees, or further reducing the wage bill...

• £4m not spent on Jozwiak and Byrne.
• £4m for Buchanan and Lawrence.
• Wages saving of those 4 players players of £3m (2 players for 2 seasons, 2 for 1 season)
• Not signing Marshall would be an extra £2m
• Clarke, Kazim and Ibe another £1m
• Baldock, Stearman, Allsop, Jagielka, Morrison £1m
• Then we can sell the likes of Sibley, Knight, Bird, etc to cover the rest

Avoiding administration trumps having a competitive squad.

[sage]

8 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I like, and am intrigued, by your precision. What is Lawrence’s salary, and the Club’s wage bill, and where have your figures come from?  Hard to believe from me I know, but this is a genuine question.

He is on £30k a week. Our club wage bill when we went into admin was quoted at £15m. it is reasonable to assume that players account for around £13m of that. I said 12% but i don't know for sure, but it looks to be between 11 and 14%.

I would add that the next best paid player is Bielik who we wouldn't have been able to sell.  

 

  

Edited October 12, 2021 by sage

[Sparkle]

3 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

There were confirmed bids for Buchanan and Lawrence 

Probably the payment schedule would be interesting - cash money up front or payment over 4 years for a negligent fee is not very entertaining 

[Sparkle]

1 hour ago, DCFC27 said:

Surely if Wigan didn’t get theirs overturned, we have no chance. They were put in admin in the middle of the start of the pandemic and still given a 12 point deduction. Their owners did leave them very soon and without trying to keep them a float.

Maybe our argument will lie on trying to persuade the commission Mel tried everything to keep the club  afloat throughout covid but eventually failed as he could not sustain the losses. 

Interestingly, the administrators seem as confident in the EFLs procedures as Mel was. I am no fan of Mel but some of the points he raised about the EFL weren’t without merit. Still a Bamford though. 
 

Totally different scenarios in my opinion - wigan had a very new owner who didn’t fancy paying all the bills at all and covid only hit for about a few months unlike Derby where it had hit for a year and a quarter with no ticket sales on match days and less than half the amount of season tickets purchased which all needed refunding into this season. If an appeal against administration 12 point deduction isn’t appropriate in this case it never would be in any case so why have an appeal system?

[Woodley Ram]

19 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It's not just those to non-sales though. It's also recruiting players and not offering other players out to clubs which compound the issue.

In my opinion, the appeal will come down to whether we did all we could to avoid administration despite Covid. Given the club's statement, I'll assume a self-sustainable model from next season. Our transfer activity over the past two summers would suggest to me we could have done more. The Covid impact was £20m. Could we have made up that amount from sales, not signing players for fees, or further reducing the wage bill...

• £4m not spent on Jozwiak and Byrne.
• £4m for Buchanan and Lawrence.
• Wages saving of those 4 players players of £3m (2 players for 2 seasons, 2 for 1 season)
• Not signing Marshall would be an extra £2m
• Clarke, Kazim and Ibe another £1m
• Baldock, Stearman, Allsop, Jagielka, Morrison £1m
• Then we can sell the likes of Sibley, Knight, Bird, etc to cover the rest

Avoiding administration trumps having a competitive squad.

it dosnt work like that. Jozwiak was a small amount up front and the rest to follow, Bryne was peanuts. The money for Buchanan and Lawrence would have been less than £4m, may be £2.5m and that would be a fraction up front, probably 500k- 750k

Marshall was free the wages for all of those is minimal. Not having those in the team = relegation with large debts. out of interest what would your team look like with with all of those gone? 

[Sparkle]

3 hours ago, Oldben said:

Under a scenario where derbys 12pts are reduced to 6pts on appeal.

Derby would still face a further 9 point deduction from the efl.

With the current squad and the transfer embargo plus not being allowed to offer high salaries for free transfers, how does Derby avoid the drop.

The administrators are attempting to reduce the 12pts so as to keep potential new buyers keen.

But if we end up on 15pts as summarised I think we still face the drop.

I read that the administrators believe that with clubs current debt and ground ownership situation, only staying in the championship offers the potential of new owners.

I think even if it was 15pts there's the further 3pts deduction for each potential breach of failing to pay players wages on time hanging over the club.

Then there's the January transfer window, players could be sold but due to transfer embargo, who could Derby bring in to strengthen the team.

Mens guilty of leaving the club without the talent to escape the drop, how can the club escape the drop without winning games instead of just drawing games.

I don’t see why a deduction would be reduced in this circumstance for me it’s 12pts or zero point deduction and personally I would say that for any club in the same situation it should be zero point reduction. Administration causes all kinds of problems for a football club whilst the 12 point deduction kills of the football aspect. These are not normal times with a worldwide global pandemic ? 

[PistoldPete]

48 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It's not just those to non-sales though. It's also recruiting players and not offering other players out to clubs which compound the issue.

In my opinion, the appeal will come down to whether we did all we could to avoid administration despite Covid. Given the club's statement, I'll assume a self-sustainable model from next season. Our transfer activity over the past two summers would suggest to me we could have done more. The Covid impact was £20m. Could we have made up that amount from sales, not signing players for fees, or further reducing the wage bill...

• £4m not spent on Jozwiak and Byrne.
• £4m for Buchanan and Lawrence.
• Wages saving of those 4 players players of £3m (2 players for 2 seasons, 2 for 1 season)
• Not signing Marshall would be an extra £2m
• Clarke, Kazim and Ibe another £1m
• Baldock, Stearman, Allsop, Jagielka, Morrison £1m
• Then we can sell the likes of Sibley, Knight, Bird, etc to cover the rest

Avoiding administration trumps having a competitive squad.

The covid impact is way more than £20 million,.. that was the impact on revenue up to the summer. It is still continuing to impact our revenues , and leave alone impact on valuations etc. We would have been relegated last year if not for signing Bryne who was our player of the year. Relegation to league One is said to have cost Sheff Wed around £8 m initially .. in Derby's case  probably much more if it had put off potential buyers. So we would have probably ended up in admin before September.  

 

Even this summer what you are advocating is a strategy that a club already firm favourites for relegation with bare bones squad should just throw in the towel and not compete at all. If we just played the schoolboys this season and lost every game it would not only guarantee relegation, but also put off potential buyers because we had already sold valuable assets at fire sale prices. Also no fans would turn up so reduced income.

We would still have big tax bills to pay, still instalments to pay on Bielik and payoffs for Cocu, still debt to MSD and no means whatever of paying them as we would have sent signals to everyone... fans , buyers and the whole world that  we had given up being a competitive football club . 

The only questionable decision imo is perhaps Jozwiak, albeit with hindsight. But even then we now know that the main instalment payment is in february 2022. That is after the January window so if there had been any chance of us making it to January then the Jozwiak payments wouldn't have changed that.  

Edited October 12, 2021 by PistoldPete

[Macintosh]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

I would have sold him if we had a decent offer.  Not sure we did or that it would have prevented admin even if we had.

Let's say Lawrence, Buchanan, Jozwiak and Knight were sold for £10m combined, all it likely would have done is reduced the losses by £10m, most of which would go to the tax man or MSD Holdings. Morris explained that the only way to sell the club was to go into administration, so I see the logic in keeping them. Maybe, if things change by January, all those could still be sold and the money reinvested in new players or some could sign new contracts and stay here?

[swanny]

43 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

I don’t see why a deduction would be reduced in this circumstance for me it’s 12pts or zero point deduction and personally I would say that for any club in the same situation it should be zero point reduction. Administration causes all kinds of problems for a football club whilst the 12 point deduction kills of the football aspect. These are not normal times with a worldwide global pandemic ? 

yes I agree.  but this is the EFL we are talking about! also there is growing pressure on them and football authorities in general. i wouldn't be surprised if we dont see a bit of 'horsetrading' when it comes to points deductions to try and save a bit of face all round and be seen to be reasonable 

[kevinhectoring]

41 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

for me it’s 12pts or zero point deduction

That may be what the rules suggest but if we do a deal it’s anywhere in between. 

the EFL is now in the spotlight. If a sale is prejudiced because the EFL is slow or difficult, the admins will deflect blame on them by referring to the EFL’s position. Then the EFL stands accused of damaging creditors interests and endangering the future of a member club. That won’t be lost on the EFl. Think it’s likely we’ll do a deal 
 

[i-Ram]

A couple of thoughts:

1) Lawrence being sold for £1m would have caused a lot of P&S problems. Pearce has him valued at £8m in his little black amortisation book.

2) Selling any players might have triggered demands from MSD in particular (protected by a floating charge over all assets of the Company). Sale of Lawrence might only have gone to making a debt repayment to them, not to be used for covering day-to-day expenses.

[Mostyn6]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It's not just those to non-sales though. It's also recruiting players and not offering other players out to clubs which compound the issue.

In my opinion, the appeal will come down to whether we did all we could to avoid administration despite Covid. Given the club's statement, I'll assume a self-sustainable model from next season. Our transfer activity over the past two summers would suggest to me we could have done more. The Covid impact was £20m. Could we have made up that amount from sales, not signing players for fees, or further reducing the wage bill...

• £4m not spent on Jozwiak and Byrne.
• £4m for Buchanan and Lawrence.
• Wages saving of those 4 players players of £3m (2 players for 2 seasons, 2 for 1 season)
• Not signing Marshall would be an extra £2m
• Clarke, Kazim and Ibe another £1m
• Baldock, Stearman, Allsop, Jagielka, Morrison £1m
• Then we can sell the likes of Sibley, Knight, Bird, etc to cover the rest

Avoiding administration trumps having a competitive squad.

You’re applying hindsight, which is not rational or reasonable. The club’s mindset at start of 20/21 season would’ve been to be competitive whilst still reducing wages etc. At the point of pre-season, the govt indicated lockdown was ending, some London clubs had fans back in and most clubs would’ve been expecting fans back in by start of season. Only for Euro 2020 to be delayed and lockdowns managed by tier and region before going nationwide.
 

Selling Bogle and signing Byrne for a much smaller fee would indicate a measurement of cost saving work. Selling players on the cheap is sign of bad business, not good business, if you’re giving away Lawrence and Buchanan for £4m, you may as well shut the club down for good.
 

Not making rubbish decisions is not punishable. Similarly, those sales would represent losses in P&S! 
 

having a professional squad is a minimum expectance, and had we had a normal/standard year of turnover, administration would NOT have happened. How can you not understand this? 
 

do you think the club should’ve not bothered trying to build a team on the off chance they’d miss a whole year of gate receipts?? How would they have known? 

[Ghost of Clough]

56 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

it dosnt work like that. Jozwiak was a small amount up front and the rest to follow, Bryne was peanuts. The money for Buchanan and Lawrence would have been less than £4m, may be £2.5m and that would be a fraction up front, probably 500k- 750k

Marshall was free the wages for all of those is minimal. Not having those in the team = relegation with large debts. out of interest what would your team look like with with all of those gone? 

You're right, but the majority of the £4m will be paid off by the end of this season if installment payments are kept to.

Marshall is on a reported £12k a week (£600k pa), hence why we tried to get rid of him in the summer.

The point is, the squad needed to be scaled back to avoid administration. Stating a desire to remain competitive is irrelevant. Similar to when Birmingham stated they exceeded P&S limits because they wanted to avoid relegation.

42 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

The covid impact is way more than £20 million,.. that was the impact on revenue up to the summer. It is still continuing to impact our revenues , and leave alone impact on valuations etc. We would have been relegated last year if not for signing Bryne who was our player of the year. Relegation to league One is said to have cost Sheff Wed around £8 m initially .. in Derby's case  probably much more if it had put off potential buyers. So we would have probably ended up in admin before September.  

Technically, Shinnie was player of the year. How do you know we wouldn't have done better last season with Ebosele and McDonald at RB? You're guessing.

The difference between the Championship and L1 is usually about £6m. For smaller clubs such as Rotherham, it can be as little as £4m difference.

Put off potential buyers if we had been relegated? They've been put off whilst we've been in the Championship. Given our points deduction, many view us as being a L1 anyway.

42 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Even this summer what you are advocating is a strategy that a club already firm favourites for relegation with bare bones squad should just throw in the towel and not compete at all. If we just played the schoolboys this season and lost every game it would not only guarantee relegation, but also put off potential buyers because we had already sold valuable assets at fire sale prices. Also no fans would turn up so reduced income.

I'm advocating cutting costs and getting in as much money as possible to avoid administration. That's a bit different to giving up before it began. Perhaps selling more of the higher earners (Lawrence), would have meant signing a couple of bargains like Morrison... cost saving but improving the overall ability of the squad.

42 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

We would still have big tax bills to pay, still instalments to pay on Bielik and payoffs for Cocu, still debt to MSD and no means whatever of paying them as we would have sent signals to everyone... fans , buyers and the whole world that  we had given up being a competitive football club . 

The only questionable decision imo is perhaps Jozwiak, albeit with hindsight. But even then we now know that the main instalment payment is in february 2022. That is after the January window so if there had been any chance of us making it to January then the Jozwiak payments wouldn't have changed that.  

Irrelevant. Avoiding administration is more important than being competitive for another year.

[Ghost of Clough]

12 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

You’re applying hindsight, which is not rational or reasonable. The club’s mindset at start of 20/21 season would’ve been to be competitive whilst still reducing wages etc. At the point of pre-season, the govt indicated lockdown was ending, some London clubs had fans back in and most clubs would’ve been expecting fans back in by start of season. Only for Euro 2020 to be delayed and lockdowns managed by tier and region before going nationwide.

And this is what has to be argued at the appeal hearing. Were our actions at the time reasonable. What you described was the best case scenario. The club should have been prepared for reasonable case and worst case scenarios. Again, we could argue we did that by selling Holmes, Evans, Whittaker, and getting compensation for the academy players in January. We only got players in on loan on minimal wages too (or nothing at all).
However, we then went into the summer and recruited, rejected offers for players, then looked into administration just days after the transfer window closed. This is the toughest part to justify.

12 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

Selling Bogle and signing Byrne for a much smaller fee would indicate a measurement of cost saving work.

As an outsider it looked like a sound business decision. Without knowing the actual financial position at the time it is difficult to to comment further.

12 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

Selling players on the cheap is sign of bad business, not good business, if you’re giving away Lawrence and Buchanan for £4m, you may as well shut the club down for good.
 

Not making rubbish decisions is not punishable. Similarly, those sales would represent losses in P&S! 

They wouldn't represent P&S losses. Buchanan is an academy graduate so would have generated a profit. Given we've been forced into changing to a standard amortisation policy, the restated figures will have shown a small profit on Lawrence.

Both players only have 1 year left on their contracts. Is £4m for the two of them fair value or not? Difficult to say.

12 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

having a professional squad is a minimum expectance, and had we had a normal/standard year of turnover, administration would NOT have happened. How can you not understand this? 

Mel's stated £1.5m a month injection roughly equates to the £20m Covid blackhole, so yes, we very likely would have been fine if it didn't happen. 
The regulations state it has to be the sole cause of going into administration. There is a question mark over our transfer activity during the period and whether it also contributed to us going into administration.

12 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

do you think the club should’ve not bothered trying to build a team on the off chance they’d miss a whole year of gate receipts?? How would they have known? 

As I said above, it comes down to whether our actions were reasonable.

[Sparkle]

If when the appeal gets heard if I was sitting on an appeals panel I would be asking the EFL to give ten examples of how a club can win an appeal against administration from their viewpoint before the hearing took place, the answers would be very interesting. The EFL should be able to answer that question or their appeal system could easily be questioned in law as being unfair.