Alan Nixon Breaks Silence on American Billionaire Bid

[Curtains]

1 minute ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

Shares in what ? companies do buy debt but at a discount and only if there is a big possibility of getting the money back, Derby is a football club, football clubs normaly dont make profits, Derby dont even have any real assets on which to leverage loans, thats what the Glaziers did at Man UTD.

The club doesnt have any real tangable assets of any value which makes a deal with HMRC more likely, if HMRC did liquidate Derby they would be looking at pennies and would loose any TAX revenues the club might pay in the future.

All that is true nevertheless that in itself is a problem for HMRC .

They will set a precedent and as we know that will upset other clubs who will say why are we paying TAX !

[Rev]

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

You should think about writing articles for the Daily Mail.

It's a steady job, but he wants to be a paperback writer.

[derby8]

3 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

Shares in what ? companies do buy debt but at a discount and only if there is a big possibility of getting the money back, Derby is a football club, football clubs normaly dont make profits, Derby dont even have any real assets on which to leverage loans, thats what the Glaziers did at Man UTD.

The club doesnt have any real tangable assets of any value which makes a deal with HMRC more likely, if HMRC did liquidate Derby they would be looking at pennies and would loose any TAX revenues the club might pay in the future.

The HMRC/MSD shares wouldn't be bought out of profits but by the existing or new investors putting in more cash in years to come. The new DC plc would though require the freehold of PP as part of the set up.

[therealhantsram]

The Administrators are smart people.

After the deal with the EFL on points penalty, they admitted in a RD interview that the appeal against the 12 point admin penalty was just a ploy to get EFL to come to the table and make a deal on the other penalties.

I say  that this story is just a similar tactic: Placed in the Mail by the admins to get HMRC to come to the table and negotiate.

I say don't panic. This is all part of the process. Let the Admins do their job.

[Curtains]

Just now, therealhantsram said:

The Administrators are smart people.

After the deal with the EFL on points penalty, they admitted in a RD interview that the appeal against the 12 point admin penalty was just a ploy to get EFL to come to the table and make a deal on the other penalties.

I say  that this story is just a similar tactic: Placed in the Mail by the admins to get HMRC to come to the table and negotiate.

I say don't panic. This is all part of the process. Let the Admins do their job.

Bury supporters might say don’t be complacent 

[CBRammette]

2 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

How do you do crowdfunding though? Where does the money go? It’s not like it’s a charity is it? I can’t say please pledge money to my bank account, that would be dodgy. 

Im not on about general crowdfunding as I think most of us are probably doing as much as we can financially. I having a delia moment "lets be having you" call to rich Derby fans with not enough to buy the club but lots of £ who could make a huge difference to this if they wanted to. Seem pretty quiet while our position is desperate if Daily Mail to be believed

[therealhantsram]

3 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Bury supporters might say don’t be complacent 

Not complacent, but based on evidence of how this team of Admins operate.

[Reggie Greenwood]

27 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

Seeing as the administrators have repeatedly stated that liquidation is not a likely outcome, I find this article, and its timing in particular, very odd indeed. 

A cynic might wonder if a certain someone, with a knack for putting stories in the papers to put pressure on our previous owner, might now be doing the same thing to the administrators, in order to push through a sale to their preferred party. 

Tom Collomose or what ever his name be is the Mail North East Correspondent and he is Gibsons man 

[Elwood P Dowd]

14 minutes ago, derby8 said:

The HMRC/MSD shares wouldn't be bought out of profits but by the existing or new investors putting in more cash in years to come. The new DC plc would though require the freehold of PP as part of the set up.

Where would the profits come from the repay the investors, if were were liquidated we would loose our league status we couldnt be a PLC as we have no assets and no history of making any profits, every one knows that to make a small fortune in football, you have to start with a large fourtune? 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Elwood P Dowd

[ThePrisoner]

5 minutes ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

Tom Collomose or what ever his name be is the Mail North East Correspondent and he is Gibsons man 

[Ram-Alf]

2 hours ago, TheresOnlyWanChope said:

Point is it’s no good dismissing the Daily Mail articles just because it’s the daily mail. The article yesterday makes it sound like HMRC want all the money which is at odds with what a lot would expect. 
If Derby had a huge shortfall due to covid why was the appeal to EFL cancelled and why isn’t there any meeting with government reps? Hope something can be sorted 

1. "Makes it sound" And here is the non story, I posted this a few weeks ago, Gerald Mortimer and Anton Ripon would write about DCFC and have a breaking story, Thier source would be "someone close to the BBG" it would be the shopkeeper 100yards away.

2. My suspicions are the EFL threatened DCFC with a prolonged Sale or being very difficult if DCFC went ahead with the appeal, Admin could not afford this as DCFC have buyers waiting for things to be wrapped up, We will never know how or why the real reasons as to why, But if my suspicion is correct it's because there would have been a cartload of other clubs looking to see if they have a case, The EFL couldn't afford this to happen, The cards were stacked in their favour.

3. I have a family member who works for the HMRC, And have been told that the format would have been a team from the HMRC would have been in meetings with DCFC for advice and re-payment before Administration, We now know that negotiations are at a stage where they demand in full the payment which imo would be outright foolish...or they are close to a settlement of payment.

4. We owe circa £25/£30m to HMRC, This is a Government organisation that collects money on behalf of our Government, The monies owed is not a drip in the ocean for what is collected in a finacial year, They kiss 100s of millions of £s a year on wasted projects that could have gone to better causes, If HMRC want to Liquidate DCFC that would be foolish in the extreme...having said that...they are civil servents who only see what's infront of them and not the bigger picture.

[StarterForTen]

I've mentioned this before but we all have to realise that HMRC are cash collectors, they are not politicised to 'make examples' of people and/or corporate entities. To pursue a path that will knowingly reduce realised debts into the public purse is 100% against their very reason for existing.

Quite rightly they will play hard ball but, ultimately, they will make a decision that brings the best possible fiscal return their way. That is highly unlikely to be from seeing a liquidation.

More likely than liquidation is a further points penalty for exiting Admin without a CVA that pays all creditors at least 25% of listed debt. HMRC know very well how these things work and where they sit in the pecking order of asset distribution - it may mean their settlement leaves insufficient sums in the 'asset pot' for lesser-ranked creditors to be paid 25% of listed debt, and that would trigger a further points penalty from the League (15 I believe, but I'm not certain) and quite possibly a harsher Business Plan to work under for the next two years.

The Administrators are merely the go-betweens in this and are there to act on the behalf of all creditors - which, of course, includes HMRC. They will know what the maximum they will be able to extract from a buyer is and will be relaying that to HMRC and other higher-ranked creditors.

One of those discussions might be that if HMRC insist on taking all of what is left in the pot after more preferential creditors have been paid then prospective buyers won't proceed at all, as it will mean a further points penalty and devalue further what they are trying to buy.

This will go on for quite some time I am sure, but ultimately, pragmatism will prevail. It always does in the end.

Edited December 2, 2021 by StarterForTen
very clunky English!

[Curtains]

11 minutes ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

Tom Collomose or what ever his name be is the Mail North East Correspondent and he is Gibsons man 

He’s a Midlands Sports writer!

He has worked for loads of people including Guardian and Independent etc 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Curtains

[Curtains]

5 minutes ago, StarterForTen said:

I've mentioned this before but we all have to realise that HMRC are cash collectors, they are not politicised to 'make examples' of people and/or corporate entities. To pursue a path that will knowingly reduce realised debts into the public purse is 100% against their very reason for existing.

Quite rightly they will play hard ball but, ultimately, they will make a decision that brings the best possible fiscal return their way. That is highly unlikely to be from seeing a liquidation.

More likely than liquidation is a further points penalty for exiting Admin without a CVA that pays all creditors at least 25% of listed debt. HMRC know very well how these things work and where they sit in the pecking order of asset distribution - it may mean their settlement leaves insufficient sums in the 'asset pot' for lesser-ranked creditors to be paid 25% of listed debt, and that would trigger a further points penalty from the League (15 I believe, but I'm not certain) and quite possibly a harsher Business Plan to work under for the next two years.

The Administrators are merely the go-betweens in this and are there to act on the behalf of all creditors - which, of course, includes HMRC. They will know what the maximum they will be able to extract from a buyer is and will be relaying that to HMRC and other higher-ranked creditors.

One of those discussions might be that if HMRC insist on taking all of what is left in the pot after more preferential creditors have been paid then prospective buyers won't proceed at all, as it will mean a further points penalty and devalue further what they are trying to buy.

This will go on for quite some time I am sure, but ultimately, pragmatism will prevail. It always does in the end.

They are a preferential creditor so who has more preference other the MSD. 
 

Anyhow I really hope you are right because i really really want DCFC to survive.

Thats the priority for all Derby Fans. 

[kevinhectoring]

28 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Because they have to pay the creditors the full amount if they are preferential and 25 percent to the others 

Preferential creditor

Description

A preferential creditor is a creditor receiving a preferential right to payment upon the debtor's bankruptcy under applicable insolvency laws. In most legal systems, some creditors are given priority over ordinary creditors, either for the whole amount of their claims or up to a certain value.
 

HMRC are one since last January 

Yes sorry I half wrote my post and sent it by accident. My point is HMRC is the ‘plug’   We’re liquidated if the purchase price does not cover football creditors and 25% of unsecureds (and we know that MSD and the admins have to get paid in full).  So doesn’t all of the excess go to HMRC  ?

So what is there to debate with HMRC ? Maybe the admins say to HMRC, please take less so we can pay unsecureds more? It’s not obvious there are other variables 

[AndyinLiverpool]

43 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

They should judge each case on its merits. Any club trying to pull a stunt may well fail. Is there any evidence that a stunt is being pulled in the case of Derby County? And what is that stunt that you refer to?

It's just my interpretation of not paying tax and then going into administration. An organisation that has not paid tax over a period of time then avoids its responsibility by going into administration. It's a stunt. And a pretty deplorable one at that.

[hintonsboots]

Some excellent posts on this thread. What is the situation with Mel ? I presume he will be handing over the stadium to the new owners for a minimal cost and writing off the soft loans. In a worse( Daily Mail) case scenario, would Mel sit on his hands and watch the club being liquidated. Would he want this has his legacy ? A statue of Mel Morris in the City centre dressed as the Grim reaper ?

If he is still reasonably wealthy, I can’t believe he wouldn’t step in and negotiate with HMRC through the administration team.

Edited December 2, 2021 by hintonsboots
Spelling poo

[PistoldPete]

8 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

It's just my interpretation of not paying tax and then going into administration. An organisation that has not paid tax over a period of time then avoids its responsibility by going into administration. It's a stunt. And a pretty deplorable one at that.

But do you not think the club was unable to afford to pay the tax? It’s not exactly something the club just chose to do. They had little  revenue coming in, due to COVID players on secure contracts and severe financial consequences also if those are not paid as a priority.

also going into admin avoids the debt getting bigger. It’s done to protect the creditors . It’s not a stunt. 

I mean you might think Morris should have stumped up the difference . Problem being I don’t know whether he has the readies to do that. And even if he did there is nothing any of us can do about that . So what point is there in Hmrc punishing the fans and the remaining creditors and indeed itself by forcing liquidation now? 

Edited December 2, 2021 by PistoldPete

[Curtains]

7 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Yes sorry I half wrote my post and sent it by accident. My point is HMRC is the ‘plug’   We’re liquidated if the purchase price does not cover football creditors and 25% of unsecureds (and we know that MSD and the admins have to get paid in full).  So doesn’t all of the excess go to HMRC  ?

So what is there to debate with HMRC ? Maybe the admins say to HMRC, please take less so we can pay unsecureds more? It’s not obvious there are other variables 

Now that’s quite feasible.

I think the crux of the whole situation is the HMRC seeming to be doing right by everyone.

Teams like Leicester were so lucky going to administration with the old rules for HMRC .

Not sure if we owed Tax when Stuart Webb saved us if we did maybe we were lucky to survive then ! 

If it was simple for the administrators to do a deal with HMRC the deal with them would have been rubber stamped by now .

We await the outcome and get behind the club and team .

I am off to Bristol tomorrow and will be shouting the team on from the stands 

 

[Curtains]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

But do you not think the club was unable to afford to pay the tax? It’s not exactly something the club just chose to do. They had little  revenue coming in, due to COVID players on secure contracts and severe financial consequences also if those are not paid as a priority.

also going into admin avoids the debt getting bigger. It’s done to protect the creditors . It’s not a stunt. 

I mean you might think Morris should have stumped up the difference . Problem being I don’t know whether he has the readies to do that. And even if he did there is nothing any of us can do about that . So what point is there in Hmrc punishing the fans and the remaining creditors and indeed itself by forcing liquidation now? 

Liquidation is a very last resort I totally agree 

Most people think it won’t come to that .

Maybe Mel will come to the rescue on that particular scenario