Derby finally accept 21 point deduction.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

7 hours ago, Pearl Ram said:

I had an issue With Manchester City and West Ham getting brand new stadia on the cheap but guess what, as there was nothing I could do about it I got over it. 

He really needs to get a life. And by the way, didn’t Bristol City release 14 million shares the other year to head off a drop of financial turbulence ? 

They definitely released that many, maybe they did it for the craic I don’t know but I’m not convinced you release that amount as a goodwill gesture.

For the last 2 years.  

[Woodley Ram]

17 hours ago, Woodley Ram said:

Well one thing we now know pop is reading our posts, not an issue I have read theirs. 
 

so pop, agree with you if PP is sold back at a discount, as Anne Widicombe would say it has something of the night about it. Still unsure  If the EFL have any power. Anyway this sis all conjecture at the moment.

yes we do want a sustainable business plan where we keep within FFfP limits 

Pop all we want is to be treated like others FFP ( we only had one high spending year) the rest we financed by sales. How can people talk about Reading getting a smaller  Deduction than us when they overspent by tens of millions, we didn’t 

we are trying to bypass anything but I  would not blame a new owner for trying to get a points  Deduction 

why don’t you come on this site and debate it

Hi Pop,

 

I see you have responded to me on the BCFC website

I have quoted you below so everyone can read.

Happy to respond to a constructive post by a poster on there. I can't join btw, not allowed. Possibly not a surprise given some of my past rants...emotive or similar but also biting back as I do bite back when I get unwarranted flak as most people would.

  Quote

Well one thing we now know pop is reading our posts, not an issue I have read theirs. 

Suppose for both parties the worse thing about being quoted or not spoken about might be not being quoted or spoken about. 

  Quote

so pop, agree with you if PP is sold back at a discount, as Anne Widicombe would say it has something of the night about it. Still unsure  If the EFL have any power. Anyway this sis all conjecture at the moment.

It would be an interesting test case IMO. Not sure the EFL would appreciate it to say the least and a new owner getting off to a bad start with the EFL couldn't be positive- although I wonder if they could separate out the two bits as part of the business plan.

  Quote

yes we do want a sustainable business plan where we keep within FFfP limits (WR)

Yep, spend up to remaining headroom once all outstanding issues sorted- talking about Jan, seems fair to me. There's a lot to sort though and I'm not even talking about the ground here. we don't want boom and bust its not good for the old ticker.  We had one stupid year where we signed players for large sums and large wages and didn't get  return on them.  The others years we have more or less traded on a net basis.  We have for the last two years operated on a small operating budget. Wages are probably circa £15m. The damage had already been done. 

  Quote

Pop all we want is to be treated like others FFP ( we only had one high spending year) the rest we financed by sales. How can people talk about Reading getting a smaller  Deduction than us when they overspent by tens of millions, we didn’t  (WR)

You'll find no arguments from me on Reading- I was criticising Reading a year and a half ago! Plus Stoke I have to question how the hell they justify that £30m Impairment, hopefully the EFL are scrutinising each and every penny of that. Reading, the thing there is that as with all clubs the 2019/20 and the 2020/21 results are added and halved. On the 3 years to 2019/20 in isolation, absolutely but we don't know how the 2020/21 might look but I thought they should be nailed for a 9 pts, although some reports said 6 and a further 3 suspended- reports suggested that Reading owning up and cooperating has helped.  We (Mel) only submitted our accounts for a negative FFP after the immortalisation issue and did it on time. we had submitted them before but rightly was asked to submit them again showing a straight line methodology. (Note here. All player valuations ended in zero and didn't have a residual amount. The issue was that the amortisation was done more on a bell curve with higher amounts up front rather than on a straight line). We have since been in discussion (like Reading) with the EFL. The only issue we had was the appeal and Mel not being quiet. You shouldn't be penalised for that.  I think Reading should get more they are so far over is ridicules

I agree the Covid impairment and how losses affect FFP (P&S) is a worry. The EFL need to come out with a rational of how they are dealing with it. (Advertising income, gate receipts, loss of entertainment other commercial activity) this should be hard as you should be able to see the loss from auditing previous years income. Also re Covid, the only way they can deduct amounts from FFP consideration is if Covid was a/is a Force Majeure. Otherwise teams should have planned for it and have taken steps to ensure that they remain within FFP (you can see where I am going here re admin appeal). BCFC must have lost £millions over the last couple of years so if you cannot deduct say the loss of £15-20m,ish from your FFP calculation then you will also be hit with an FFP points deduction?

A difference between Derby and Reading is that the Derby 9 with 3 more suspended is deemed to be a final settlement or proposed as such- whereas the Reading one could just be a first instalment, I saw that as well as a deduction, renewal of players on existing terms could prove difficult and they could face a further deduction in the next year or 2. If they get a deduction and sell Swift in Jan say, they could slide into real issues on the pitch? Saw a stat other day, he has chipped in with goals or assists about 2/3 of the clubs League goals or 60%, something..out of contract in the summer! Think Blackburn and renewal might pose an issue with quite a few key assets although selling Armstrong has surely helped them to ease things.

A troubling thing about Reading too? Rahman and Drinkwater loans, covered minimum 90% by Chelsea! Ridiculous! Their individual wage cap=£8.5k per week x 6 players, those 2 combined wages £170k so...no loan fees payable. Also suggest that for that wage level, Dann and Halilovic look suspiciously good players albeit signed on frees. I agree, add Fulham not paying for Harry Wilson for 2 years and others will also be pushing the boundaries with FFP and the ethics of it.

  Quote

we are trying to bypass anything but I  would not blame a new owner for trying to get a points  Deduction  WR

Do you mean removed or reduced? Suppose a new owner might try but given that the burden of failure with these issues lies with the club and not the owner, there is an an attempt at bypassing arguably- not now so much but the delays of accounts to the EFL, the alleged procedural defences in May 2021, to sell as a Championship club was possible. Sorry spell check on my ipad. we are not trying to bypass anything. If we are able to use the rules to get a reduction of points then that's ok. After all isn't that what other clubs have done Birmingham, Sheffield Wednesday and it seems Reading?

  Quote

why don’t you come on this site and debate it

Would if I could!

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Woodley Ram

[kevinhectoring]

17 hours ago, CornwallRam said:

Nobody is saying that Mel can't sell the ground for any figure he chooses.

I am  

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

It like having a wired proxy mr pop in here having his OTIB post and ours copied/quoted backwards and forward. Why don’t we let him rejoin (assume banned). To make the debate less complex.?

[Mucker1884]

58 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

I am  

Pray explain.

I'm a bit rubbish with all this finance stuff, but I'd like to think I could sell my house for whatever figure I wish.  Or at least advertise for sale at whatever price I choose?
Why can't Mel do the same with his stadium?  

[Chester40]

2 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

Pray explain.

I'm a bit rubbish with all this finance stuff, but I'd like to think I could sell my house for whatever figure I wish.  Or at least advertise for sale at whatever price I choose?
Why can't Mel do the same with his stadium?  

I've no idea really....but, eg if I was terminally ill and had a family, but wanted to leave my multi -million £ house to my 'new, young bit on the side'...I may think I was being clever if I just sold it to her for a fiver, in reality it wouldn't be as simple as that!

[Indy]

3 minutes ago, Chester40 said:

I've no idea really....but, eg if I was terminally ill and had a family, but wanted to leave my multi -million £ house to my 'new, young bit on the side'...I may think I was being clever if I just sold it to her for a fiver, in reality it wouldn't be as simple as that!

I don’t understand how this analogy is relevant. The issues would be inheritance tax and family claims - nothing like what we’re talking about. 
 

When selling the stadium between two companies he owns there are interests in ensuring a fair market price is used. Sell for too much and EFL would see it as by passing P&S to pump more funds into the club. Sell for too little and HMRC would question the tax payable and if there was money laundering questions. 
 

Now that Mel is not the owner of DCFC, I thought any sale would be between unrelated parties and he can charge what he likes. If it’s below any previous valuation, that would be his choice. Similar to him choosing to write off debts owed to him by the club if he chooses.

The club benefits from getting its asset back. Mel benefits because this action would probably ensure that the club would actually find a buyer.

[Mucker1884]

13 minutes ago, Chester40 said:

I've no idea really....but, eg if I was terminally ill and had a family, but wanted to leave my multi -million £ house to my 'new, young bit on the side'...I may think I was being clever if I just sold it to her for a fiver, in reality it wouldn't be as simple as that!

Well... erm... thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

Oh yeah... sorry to hear your news, but at least you had fun.  Let's just hope they can get the lid on!  ?

[Chester40]

6 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

Well... erm... thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

Oh yeah... sorry to hear your news, but at least you had fun.  Let's just hope they can get the lid on!  ?

Haha. Like I said I'm no financial expert.

My point was just saying 'It's mine, I can do what I want with it' isn't always that simple. 

As for not seeing the merit of the analogy @Indy I'm sure legally it has more holes in it than Mel's Christmas card list, but morally gifting an asset to new owners (freeing up their money to spend on other things) which simplistically can be seen as being at the expense of not paying taxes, other businesses, people, debts? 

If so, the EFL and our detractors are definitely not going to be a fan of it as a concept?

 

[kevinhectoring]

43 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

Pray explain.

I'm a bit rubbish with all this finance stuff, but I'd like to think I could sell my house for whatever figure I wish.  Or at least advertise for sale at whatever price I choose?
Why can't Mel do the same with his stadium?  

The stadium is controlled by MSD. Mel can do nothing with it without MSD’s consent. If he attempted to, the stadium owning company would be put into administration. 

If you’ve got a mortgage on your house you can only sell it for a price that clears the mortgage debt. Unless you get bank consent 
 

the advertising thing seems a red herring tbh

[Ghost of Clough]

19 hours ago, CornwallRam said:

That's not really the point. Nobody is saying that Mel can't sell the ground for any figure he chooses. They key part is what will that do to any FFP/P&S decisions/appeals/punishments.

Because the EFL love us so much and their rules allow them to revisit any decision, I can pretty much guarantee that they will look at any sale for less than say £70m. 

I actually don't expect they'd bring fresh charges because I think they'd be advised that Covid and administration have changed market conditions to such an extent that a current sale couldn't be used as evidence to question a previous valuation. 

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

I am  

2 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

The stadium is controlled by MSD. Mel can do nothing with it without MSD’s consent. If he attempted to, the stadium owning company would be put into administration. 

If you’ve got a mortgage on your house you can only sell it for a price that clears the mortgage debt. Unless you get bank consent 
 

the advertising thing seems a red herring tbh

What you're actually saying is that he can with MSD's consent.

Mel can sell the ground for as little (or as much) as he wants if it is an unrelated party.

[Mucker1884]

1 minute ago, kevinhectoring said:

The stadium is controlled by MSD. Mel can do nothing with it without MSD’s consent. If he attempted to, the stadium owning company would be put into administration. 

If you’ve got a mortgage on your house you can only sell it for a price that clears the mortgage debt. Unless you get bank consent 
 

the advertising thing seems a red herring tbh

I'd forgotten about the MSD involvement!  Bit daft of me, considering it's a major involvement!  ?

 

Without that though?  Let's say Mel pay's them off first, out of his own pocket, and out of the goodness of his heart, and he (or his company) becomes the sole and exclusive owner.

Surely then he can name his price?  Surely then, he's entitled to literally give it away, if he so desires?  No?  ?‍♂️

[kevinhectoring]

18 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

I'd forgotten about the MSD involvement!  Bit daft of me, considering it's a major involvement!  ?

 

Without that though?  Let's say Mel pay's them off first, out of his own pocket, and out of the goodness of his heart, and he (or his company) becomes the sole and exclusive owner.

Surely then he can name his price?  Surely then, he's entitled to literally give it away, if he so desires?  No?  ?‍♂️

I think you’re right      I guess that if there were other creditors of the stadium owning co he could get into hot water if they went unpaid by reason of the company selling the asset for peanuts    

[kevinhectoring]

30 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

What you're actually saying is that he can with MSD's consent.

Mel can sell the ground for as little (or as much) as he wants if it is an unrelated party.

Yes to your first comment. Thinking about it, MSD might have no problem with 202 gifting PP to the club because it remains subject to their charge. Haven’t studied Mr Ploppy’s murky diatribe - maybe that’s what he’s suggesting we will do ? God knows what the FFP effect of that would be 
 

all sounds a bit whacky and who knows about tax, stamp duty etc 

Didn’t understand your second sentence 

[ram59]

If the potential new owners were forced to pay MM £80M for the ground in addition to clearing the debts, nobody would be interested and the club would go under. Unless they paid MM the £80M and he then agreed to use that money to clear the clubs debts, but I don't know if that would be legally possible. After all, isn't this what MM was trying to do, when he tried to sell club himself?

[Indy]

1 hour ago, ram59 said:

If the potential new owners were forced to pay MM £80M for the ground in addition to clearing the debts, nobody would be interested and the club would go under. Unless they paid MM the £80M and he then agreed to use that money to clear the clubs debts, but I don't know if that would be legally possible. After all, isn't this what MM was trying to do, when he tried to sell club himself?

I think this is the point. If Mel sold the stadium back at a reduced price (having settled the charge with MSD) it wouldn’t be charity, as he’s benefiting by being able to actually ensure the club gets a new owner. Although not sure if that’s his problem any more!

I’m confident that the administrators would only sanction a deal that was totally above board and not relying on contestanle loopholes, anyway. 

[Macintosh]

Well, the 21 days for the Independent Panel is up on Sunday for them to make their decision, there should be good news either that day or Monday.

[B4ev6is]

10 minutes ago, Macintosh said:

Well, the 21 days for the Independent Panel is up on Sunday for them to make their decision, there should be good news either that day or Monday.

Actually 28 days before we know who new owner or owners are.

[Jimbo Ram]

2 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

Actually 28 days before we know who new owner or owners are.

That precise B4 ? What time?

[B4ev6is]

3 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

That precise B4 ? What time?

No I dont know what time but saw 28 days thing after club went into admin but saying quite far in those 28 days I guess admin looking at different bids in for club and I guess looking at funds and back grounds of each person or groups but try find best fit the club and who cal clear debts asp or ones perhaps clear them all in one go.