The Administration Thread

[sunnyhill60]

14 minutes ago, Rev said:

If you're a creditor, wouldn't you question why the former owner could commit possibly £50m+ to a court case against two claimants with flimsy cases, but you're expected to take 25p in the pound for actual real debt?

If a way is not found out of this mess they will get nowt!

[SamUltraRam]

47 minutes ago, Rev said:

 

Even if they were to take up the offer, surely the actual real creditors such as HMRC and the other businesses effected would question why the man who put us into administration can cover court costs, and a possible liability of £50m odd quid, to deal with claims currently without value, when they're offered 25p in the pound?

Legal minefield, surely?

 

 

I can see your point but on the flipside, if he doesn't do this then the creditors will get a share of £0 when we liquidate

[BramcoteRam84]

1 hour ago, angieram said:

I think Kirchner is being very indiscreet on Twitter and I am not sure what giving him an opportunity to air his dirty linen in public will acheive.

He might say that the administrators and Mel are the bad guys (and I am sure he is at least partly right in this) but unfortunately the very future of our club lies in their hands.

So Kirchner comes out with some smoking gun on Monday that makes it less likely that we sell our club out of administration. We need to make sure he doesn't shoot DCFC in the foot with it. Best way to do that is not give him the platform to do it.

Well to be fair he already has the platform as he’s on with BAWT on Monday. His style is quite abrasive so get why it winds people up but while some of what he says is twisted in his favour to some degree, think he’s an impulsive shoot from the hip guy who says it as it is. He has been involved in the process and therefore does have valuable insight and opinion that we shouldn’t take verbatim but also not discount. 
 

We will see if Mel’s intervention has moved the “main” obstacle out of the way and if so then we should see a swift passage to a preferred bidder if Quantuma have been straight with us.
 

I’m hopeful and have backed Quantuma throughout as they’re dealing with an impossible situation. Gerald Krasner’s interview on RD with Chris Coles is well worth a listen, big point he made is Qs fees are not excessive for this type of work and basically they will be working bloody hard satisfying all their obligations as legally appointed administrators. But if this obstacle is out of the way then the pressure is definitely on them to make this happen quickly and hopefully discount the nonsense from the other side (and Kirchner) that they haven’t got everything else sorted.

[Day]

Just been looking across forums and social media, gauge the reaction from the Boro side to the statement made tonight.

If they believed Gibson had a strong case, surely the reaction would be to say bring it on, but that's not the case at all.

The majority are not interested, he can't do that, doesn't mean it, even no to arbitration, just pay up with the £40m figure being banded around.

Did come across a few that would prefer to see this dropped completely, but as I say the majority appear to be more interested in extortion with the backing from Forest and Leeds fans.

I would hope that Gibson has bigger balls than his own fans, and the desire to see his claims of systematic cheating proven in a court of law.

What does he have to lose?

Continue his claims through arbitration where his counsel is not free until May, which by that point we could be liquidated and wouldn't see a penny anyway.

There is no bidder willing to pay extortion money, so this is the best offer he has of seeing a penny of what he thinks he's owed.

Anyhow, 1am that's enough. Weekend off now with Twitter notifications on for the EFL Comms account to see what the EFL's true intentions are for this club.

[Rambam]

5 hours ago, David said:

Just been looking across forums and social media, gauge the reaction from the Boro side to the statement made tonight.

If they believed Gibson had a strong case, surely the reaction would be to say bring it on, but that's not the case at all.

The majority are not interested, he can't do that, doesn't mean it, even no to arbitration, just pay up with the £40m figure being banded around.

Did come across a few that would prefer to see this dropped completely, but as I say the majority appear to be more interested in extortion with the backing from Forest and Leeds fans.

I would hope that Gibson has bigger balls than his own fans, and the desire to see his claims of systematic cheating proven in a court of law.

What does he have to lose?

Continue his claims through arbitration where his counsel is not free until May, which by that point we could be liquidated and wouldn't see a penny anyway.

There is no bidder willing to pay extortion money, so this is the best offer he has of seeing a penny of what he thinks he's owed.

Anyhow, 1am that's enough. Weekend off now with Twitter notifications on for the EFL Comms account to see what the EFL's true intentions are for this club.

Great expression… ‘extortion money’.

I’ve always wondered where the hell does he think this ‘£40 million’ was going to come from? 

[Mucker1884]

EFL:
For the avoidance of any doubt the EFL is requesting the attendance of Administrators and the following stakeholders to participate: the current highest bidder(s), Middlesbrough FC, Wycombe Wanderers FC, Mel Morris, MSD Partners and HMRC.

 

Mel:

[Ghost of Clough]

6 hours ago, Rev said:

If you're a creditor, wouldn't you question why the former owner could commit possibly £50m+ to a court case against two claimants with flimsy cases, but you're expected to take 25p in the pound for actual real debt?

Mel stated it's a 7 figure claim (less than £10m), which backs up the reported £7m.

[Ghost of Clough]

The parasites have been backed into a corner they will struggle to get out of.

Accept the offer - they were willing to liquidate the club due to personal grievances.

Reject the offer - they just want to see the club liquidated.

[Mucker1884]

7 hours ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

Nah.  Bit like the Apollo 11 mission, people aren't interested in the sequel.  Need to shake it up like Apollo 13 and that keeps people interested.  March to EFL headquarters sounds good to me.

WHOA!  Just hang on one cockamamie minute or two here, buddy.

This needs a little more discussion... and a heck of a lot more clarification... before we all sign up to this! ?

 

Let's start with the starting point, shall we...

 

?

[Ghost of Clough]

10 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

WHOA!  Just hang on one cockamamie minute or two here, buddy.

This needs a little more discussion... and a heck of a lot more clarification... before we all sign up to this! ?

 

Let's start with the starting point, shall we...

 

?

You're up for a 88 mile hike from Pride Park to the HQ in Preston?

I guess an additional 88 mile hike back home too considering you'll leave your car in Derby.

[Mucker1884]

2 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

You're up for a 88 mile hike from Pride Park to the HQ in Preston?

I guess an additional 88 mile hike back home too considering you'll leave your car in Derby.

I will be taking counsel, in order to consider my options, and will not be making any further comments at this point.

[kevinhectoring]

7 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

We need to go after the EFL. They are backing Gibson in his pathetic claim against our club. A claim that could finish us. Perhaps you don't realise what is at stake or you don't care enough about it.

Please don’t suggest I don’t care about it

if you seriously think the EFl are supporting Gibson then you can’t see what is playing out in front of your eyes. Despite a mountain of evidence. 
 

There’s no harm pillorying the EFl with emails, in fact it all helps. As do protests in Derby against EFl and Boro and the rest. But you get a load of Derby fans outside EFl House and you risk events spiralling out of control in a very bad way, which will attract more press attention that all of our efforts to date. And will bring shame on us all and damage the club that I love just as much as you 

[Chester40]

5 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Please don’t suggest I don’t care about it

if you seriously think the EFl are supporting Gibson then you can’t see what is playing out in front of your eyes. Despite a mountain of evidence. 
 

There’s no harm pillorying the EFl with emails, in fact it all helps. As do protests in Derby against EFl and Boro and the rest. But you get a load of Derby fans outside EFl House and you risk events spiralling out of control in a very bad way, which will attract more press attention that all of our efforts to date. And will bring shame on us all and damage the club that I love just as much as you 

I want to ask.....but you know what nope, not worth it.

 

[TooFarInToTurnRed]

7 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

No, we need to keep the MP's pressure on Parry at the EFL . Thats the one thing that can force the issue after Morris's invitation to solve the "claims that have not yet been made" issue.

A protest or two at Preston and London EFL offices would not go amiss, the publicity would put pressure on Parry.

Parry is the key. If he turns against Gibson, Derby survive. 

Morris has forced him into making that decision.

Think Parry should be considering his position, the accusations of being given free reign to piss all over the rules is damning imo. Only reason Stoke (selling losses to parent company) and Forest (related party dodgy deals) are not being prosecute(persecuted) is they haven’t finished 1 place above the wrong team. 

[PistoldPete]

33 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

WHOA!  Just hang on one cockamamie minute or two here, buddy.

This needs a little more discussion... and a heck of a lot more clarification... before we all sign up to this! ?

 

Let's start with the starting point, shall we...

 

?

If we are talking hikes, let's at least start in the Lake District, that's not too far from Preston.

[Tamworthram]

8 hours ago, atherstoneram said:

Yes compensation from the club,not compensation from MM.

What grounds would they have for caring where the compensation comes from, they (allegedly) just want the money for the income they have lost not to see the death of DCFC?

[TooFarInToTurnRed]

14 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Please don’t suggest I don’t care about it

if you seriously think the EFl are supporting Gibson then you can’t see what is playing out in front of your eyes. Despite a mountain of evidence. 
 

There’s no harm pillorying the EFl with emails, in fact it all helps. As do protests in Derby against EFl and Boro and the rest. But you get a load of Derby fans outside EFl House and you risk events spiralling out of control in a very bad way, which will attract more press attention that all of our efforts to date. And will bring shame on us all and damage the club that I love just as much as you 

I emailed Rick Parry yesterday morning but not had a response:

Dear Mr Parry,

 I would like some clarification on the statement put out by your organisation on 3rd February 2022 regarding the situation of Derby County.

Point 1, the statement that “no Club should gain (or seek to gain) any advantage within the context of professional football over other Clubs by not paying all its creditors in full at all times” appears incongruent with the fact that Nottingham Forest, were according to their published accounts, write off a loan of £5million during the year ending 2020 with no apparent recourse. Is this an oversight and you will look to immediately rectify or do different rules apply?

Point 2, the statement is clearly prejudicial and clearly insinuates the claims from Middlesbrough and Wycombe are debts. As I understand it they are not and therefore should not referred to, even by insinuation, as debts. They are heavily disputed claims. The definition of a debt is “the obligation to pay a sum of money owed” and at present no obligation exist. Will you acknowledge and release a statement to the effect that these are not debts as they are currently untested? I believe by referring to them as you have you may have prejudiced the cases against Derby County.

Point 3, I understand that the current regulation specifically prohibits taking legal action outside of the EFL framework but that this is now you current proposed action. This will undoubtedly lead to a significant increase in legal costs for all parties, should Derby be successfully exonerated will the EFL cover these costs as it failed in its duty under its own regulations?  

Finally, it is rumoured in the press that several Championship clubs are likely to breach the Profit & Sustainability regulations during the current season. Can you confirm that this summer you will again be using ‘interchangeable fixture lists and will support compensation claims made against such clubs by others?  As several of these clubs are currently occupying places in or around the top of the division so I would urge you to move the Play-offs to the end of July to allow for the participants decided by the Courts.

 

Your current narrative appears to distract people from the lack of leadership and incompetence shown by your organisation by attempting try to turn people against Derby County by trying to rile people against us by continually bringing up the money owed to HMRC. Unfortunately this does not appear to be having the desired effect and it appears you will be on the wrong side of history.

 

[seths-cap]

The situation yesterday reminded me of the battle of the bar stewards.

Mel coming in when all hope seemed lost like a bald, middle aged Sansa Stark.

Obviously Gibbo’s Ramsey Bolton.

[Ted McMinn Football Genius]

6 minutes ago, TooFarInToTurnRed said:

I emailed Rick Parry yesterday morning but not had a response:

Dear Mr Parry,

 I would like some clarification on the statement put out by your organisation on 3rd February 2022 regarding the situation of Derby County.

Point 1, the statement that “no Club should gain (or seek to gain) any advantage within the context of professional football over other Clubs by not paying all its creditors in full at all times” appears incongruent with the fact that Nottingham Forest, were according to their published accounts, write off a loan of £5million during the year ending 2020 with no apparent recourse. Is this an oversight and you will look to immediately rectify or do different rules apply?

Point 2, the statement is clearly prejudicial and clearly insinuates the claims from Middlesbrough and Wycombe are debts. As I understand it they are not and therefore should not referred to, even by insinuation, as debts. They are heavily disputed claims. The definition of a debt is “the obligation to pay a sum of money owed” and at present no obligation exist. Will you acknowledge and release a statement to the effect that these are not debts as they are currently untested? I believe by referring to them as you have you may have prejudiced the cases against Derby County.

Point 3, I understand that the current regulation specifically prohibits taking legal action outside of the EFL framework but that this is now you current proposed action. This will undoubtedly lead to a significant increase in legal costs for all parties, should Derby be successfully exonerated will the EFL cover these costs as it failed in its duty under its own regulations?  

Finally, it is rumoured in the press that several Championship clubs are likely to breach the Profit & Sustainability regulations during the current season. Can you confirm that this summer you will again be using ‘interchangeable fixture lists and will support compensation claims made against such clubs by others?  As several of these clubs are currently occupying places in or around the top of the division so I would urge you to move the Play-offs to the end of July to allow for the participants decided by the Courts.

 

Your current narrative appears to distract people from the lack of leadership and incompetence shown by your organisation by attempting try to turn people against Derby County by trying to rile people against us by continually bringing up the money owed to HMRC. Unfortunately this does not appear to be having the desired effect and it appears you will be on the wrong side of history.

 

Very well worded and concise, it would have been at least a further 10 paragraphs had I tried to generate such correspondence to anyone at the EFL.

You won’t have had a response from the EFL or RP yet, they are still putting the wording into a dictionary to decipher there meanings ???

[Tamworthram]

40 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The parasites have been backed into a corner they will struggle to get out of.

Accept the offer - they were willing to liquidate the club due to personal grievances.

Reject the offer - they just want to see the club liquidated.

I’m not sure about your first point.

Whilst I seriously doubt they’ll take the offer up, to accept it should be a good get out for them and prove that all they ever wanted was fair compensation for the loss in income they have suffered as Derby, the club itself, has already been punished in accordance with EFL rules. They could (but won’t) say they accept the offer as it allows them to pursue their legitimate claims without being a barrier to Derby exiting administration because they care so much (not) about a fellow club.

I think they’ll find some way to avoid accepting the offer because they know their best chance of getting anything is to continue to hold DCFC’s future for ransom.