Alan Nixon Breaks Silence on American Billionaire Bid

[Tamworthram]

8 hours ago, Philmycock said:

We're gonna romp the Northern Premier League, c'mon you Lambs

Interesting that you’re switching your allegiance to Tamworth FC and it’s a nice idea but, I can’t see them reaching the dazzling heights of the NPL any time soon ?

[strawhillram]

22 minutes ago, Rab a dab doo said:

Half a cup is always better than no cup at all !

Unless you only have the top  half

[CBRammette]

Problem is what was a fairly low key standard (for them) meeting between HMRC and the administrators where each side would have been prepared with in HMRCs case their position authorised is now being whipped up by the media. This will then perhaps be on the radar of those more senior within HMRC or the Treasury who will read the deluge of stuff on twitter etc and suddenly it becomes more high profile and perhaps politicised so that the message is "its taxpayers funds, times are hard, cant let this high profile debtor get away with it". This was probably the aim of the article and other commentators with an agenda in the first place. That is what worries me greatly. 

[PistoldPete]

1 minute ago, CBRammette said:

Problem is what was a fairly low key standard (for them) meeting between HMRC and the administrators where each side would have been prepared with in HMRCs case their position authorised is now being whipped up by the media. This will then perhaps be on the radar of those more senior within HMRC or the Treasury who will read the deluge of stuff on twitter etc and suddenly it becomes more high profile and perhaps politicised so that the message is "its taxpayers funds, times are hard, cant let this high profile debtor get away with it". This was probably the aim of the article and other commentators with an agenda in the first place. That is what worries me greatly. 

Exactly. But it's taxpayers funds that will get pished up the wall if HMRC don't accept a deal.  

[Ram-Alf]

4 minutes ago, CBRammette said:

Problem is what was a fairly low key standard (for them) meeting between HMRC and the administrators where each side would have been prepared with in HMRCs case their position authorised is now being whipped up by the media. This will then perhaps be on the radar of those more senior within HMRC or the Treasury who will read the deluge of stuff on twitter etc and suddenly it becomes more high profile and perhaps politicised so that the message is "its taxpayers funds, times are hard, cant let this high profile debtor get away with it". This was probably the aim of the article and other commentators with an agenda in the first place. That is what worries me greatly. 

Maybe Rishi Sunak is not aware but i'll guarantee there will be a Senior HMRC advisor aware or even at the table with Admin, Football is seen as an anathema to HMRC where time after time they put in winding up orders of football clubs only for a judge to throw it out.

I'm confident we'll be sold, HMRC will accept a deal, And DCFC will move on...albeit in League 1.

[BramcoteRam84]

1 hour ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

Yes my mistake it’s Craig Hope who is the Mail NE correspondent. My only excuse is the cocktail of drugs the Derby Royal are pumping in me 

Sorry to hear that mate. Hope you’re ok. 

[I know nuffin]

5 hours ago, GadFly said:

Forgive my possible stupidity, but perhaps somebody can enlighten me... 

If we owe 30 odd million in unpaid monies to HMRC... why should they write that money off/reduce the debt? I'm looking for answers that don't resort to whataboutery please. I'm not interested in "well Amazon/Starbucks/whoever don't pay their taxes so why should we?" or anything like that (I mean, for starters, two wrongs don't make a right...). What I want to know is - from the perspective of a non-Rams-supporting everyday taxpayer, why should their tax money be used to prop up a football club that they have no association with, and couldn't care less if it went out of existence? Wouldn't that money be better spent on education or healthcare? Why should any of us continue to play fair and pay our fair share, if DCFC won't/don't? 

Surely if you're going to advocate and hope for DCFC to have their unpaid taxes ignored, then you cannot ever take a moral position against any other corporation not paying their taxes, ever again? 

If I've got this completely wrapped around my neck then I do apologise, but I'd also like to understand the situation a little better so please don't go too hard on me if I'm just being dumb - enlighten me instead! ?

The administrators put it simply. There are not enough assets to cover all of the creditors. The creditors therefore have a choice to either accept less or the company is liquidated and they will get even less because both Dells "mortgage" on pride park and the administrators fees will take the bulk of cash received from what would be a fire sale. If HMRC lake less the company will continue and pay tax, if they don't they get less and nothing going forward. Away from football I would suggest similar deals have happened with depart stores, some paid creditors less and survived, some went under and creditors got next to nothing. From Debenhams they got nothing as it liquidated, house of Frazier I think was bought out and survived. The argument is that it is better to take less than you are owed and get money in years to come rather than insist on getting the full amount and end up getting a smaller lump sum and nothing in the future

[Rammysees]

There is also the possibility that HMRC will accept phased payments over a number of years eg £2m/3m pa over 10 years on top of future annual tax payments 

[Poynton ram]

Article on bbc website where Rooney says liquidation won’t happen. Brave to come out and say that but am assuming he is close to CK and will be more ITK than some of these so called journos. Just hope he doesn’t have his head turned when Benitez is sacked

[I know nuffin]

3 hours ago, Ramarena said:

Hmmmmmm indeed.

I’m not sure why the manager is actively and heavily pushing one bid over any other potential ones, that coincidentally involves his agent.
 

He should be leaving it to the administrators to sort out, what if Kirchners bid isn’t the best one for the club and another is?

I understand people saying, well what if it’s this or liquidation. And I agree this would be better, but it would raise a lot of concerns going forwards!

I am equally surprised that none of the alleged others have consulted the manager in making their business plan

[PistoldPete]

7 minutes ago, I know nuffin said:

The administrators put it simply. There are not enough assets to cover all of the creditors. The creditors therefore have a choice to either accept less or the company is liquidated and they will get even less because both Dells "mortgage" on pride park and the administrators fees will take the bulk of cash received from what would be a fire sale. If HMRC lake less the company will continue and pay tax, if they don't they get less and nothing going forward. Away from football I would suggest similar deals have happened with depart stores, some paid creditors less and survived, some went under and creditors got next to nothing. From Debenhams they got nothing as it liquidated, house of Frazier I think was bought out and survived. The argument is that it is better to take less than you are owed and get money in years to come rather than insist on getting the full amount and end up getting a smaller lump sum and nothing in the future

Even debenhams carried on trading online after they were liquidated. Look up what Debenhams owners did to them, their employees, their pensioners etc... after Philip Green stripped out dividends and paid to his wife in Monaco.  ANd their owner after him too, dodgy.

By contrast  Derby whose recent problems are mostly not of their making but due to no fans being allowed in the ground  and some still staying away due to COVID,  would be banished by EFL to the lower leagues. ANd people here talking about the morality of someone who never took any dividends .. spent too much on player wages (which means he paid too much to HMRC too by the way). And even if he is immoral why punish the club the fans, the creditors and even HMRc itself. Would be mad,  beyond mad. 

   

[PistoldPete]

9 minutes ago, Rammysees said:

There is also the possibility that HMRC will accept phased payments over a number of years eg £2m/3m pa over 10 years on top of future annual tax payments 

They might. But the potentail buyers probably wouldn't. They don't owe HMRC anything at all.  

[Ram-Alf]

36 minutes ago, CBRammette said:

Problem is what was a fairly low key standard (for them) meeting between HMRC and the administrators where each side would have been prepared with in HMRCs case their position authorised is now being whipped up by the media. This will then perhaps be on the radar of those more senior within HMRC or the Treasury who will read the deluge of stuff on twitter etc and suddenly it becomes more high profile and perhaps politicised so that the message is "its taxpayers funds, times are hard, cant let this high profile debtor get away with it". This was probably the aim of the article and other commentators with an agenda in the first place. That is what worries me greatly. 

Further to above, Just had this message back from a family member concerning who'd Admin would be talking too.

"Would be dealt with by the Insolvancey handling unit aka ICHU. They would negotiate to see if can come to an agreement or if future revenue benefit is not worth it for HMRC . Which that wouldn’t be an issue. So the debt would be dealt with and negotiating with the large business tax man for the club and debt management"

Big deals and community interest type stuff as Derby is may even be hand shake higher up.

 

[Ram-Alf]

1 minute ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Further to above, Just had this message back from a family member concerning who'd Admin would be talking too.

"Would be dealt with by the Insolvancey handling unit aka ICHU. They would negotiate to see if can come to an agreement or if future revenue benefit is not worth it for HMRC . Which that wouldn’t be an issue. So the debt would be dealt with and negotiating with the large business tax man for the club and debt management"

Big deals and community interest type stuff as Derby is may even be hand shake higher up.

 

A little more

The most I dealt with was around £6mil across 6 companies. PAYE CT AND CAT debt.

Managed to agree something to clear over 4 months. Had to call agent each month and tell him what to pay to avoid the most interest first. Nice guy in London. Offered me tickets to the theatre as his mate is some bloke called mackintosh big in the business. Couldn’t accept unfortunately but we cleared the debt in full and they still trade today.

Huge employer so was in the best interest to let them have a time to pay rather than wind up.

The director was selling all his personal stuff down to watches etc.

[Sheff Ram]

6 hours ago, GadFly said:

Yeah I appreciate that and I agree... but that kind of brings us full circle to my original question - aside from what essentially amounts to sympathy for the fans, why should/would your average citizen give a toss if Derby get liquidated? Surely from the neutral perspective of your average taxpayer, you'd want to insist that the debt is paid in full and if not, the club should be punished and prevented from operating in the future? Imagine it wasn't Derby, or even another football club.. 

Right, you've got your point over. You can move on now. We ARE Derby fans and we DO want the club to survive, so please spare us your repeated "matter-of-factness" about how we should pay our HMRC tax bill in full.

That's all.

[Rev]

Maybe time to have a quiet word in the right ear!

http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Donations/C0331007

.

 

 

[Curtains]

2 hours ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

Yes my mistake it’s Craig Hope who is the Mail NE correspondent. My only excuse is the cocktail of drugs the Derby Royal are pumping in me 

Get well soon mate 

[CBRammette]

52 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Maybe Rishi Sunak is not aware but i'll guarantee there will be a Senior HMRC advisor aware or even at the table with Admin, Football is seen as an anathema to HMRC where time after time they put in winding up orders of football clubs only for a judge to throw it out.

I'm confident we'll be sold, HMRC will accept a deal, And DCFC will move on...albeit in League 1.

We need a fingers crossed emoji!

[Kathcairns]

17 minutes ago, Sheff Ram said:

Right, you've got your point over. You can move on now. We ARE Derby fans and we DO want the club to survive, so please spare us your repeated "matter-of-factness" about how we should pay our HMRC tax bill in full.

That's all.

Arn't theHMRC partly to blame for letting the club get into that much debt in the first place.

[Gritstone Tup]

29 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Further to above, Just had this message back from a family member concerning who'd Admin would be talking too.

"Would be dealt with by the Insolvancey handling unit aka ICHU. They would negotiate to see if can come to an agreement or if future revenue benefit is not worth it for HMRC . Which that wouldn’t be an issue. So the debt would be dealt with and negotiating with the large business tax man for the club and debt management"

Big deals and community interest type stuff as Derby is may even be hand shake higher up.

 

You’re missing a big factor off there, we’re a football club, no sympathy, to be made an example of. If not, then it could become common practice within the football industry. The precedent is already there with Bury etc mentioned above, do HMRC want to reset the precedent to make it a common thing fir football to decide how much they pay!?