The Administration Thread

[MackworthRamIsGod]

1 hour ago, Arsene Titman said:

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-morris-kirchner-takeover-7059719
 

According to the Derby Telegraph, Sky Sports are now reporting that MM is prepared to agree a leasing deal on the stadium. 

I thought that was old news.

The issue was that CK didn't want Mel to have anything to do with the club, the same as me.

 

[admira]

2 hours ago, Mostyn6 said:

a few years ago, I put my 12" Vinyl (Music) Collection (records for the youngsters) on eBay. Easily four figure value.

Some moron PM'd me within 10 minutes offering me £300 cash for a quick sale.

I didn't respond to him. Not cos I'm incompetent. But because he was a cheapskate chancer trying it on.

People backing Ashley need to consider that his bid was so insulting, it wasn't worthy of a response.

Off topic I know but I've been cataloguing my collection on Discogs. Current maximum value is £45k. Maybe I'll flog 'em all and put a bid in for the club...

[angieram]

24 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Yes, a bit from Percy

"It is understood Ashley agreed a deal with Morris in December, which included the purchase of Pride Park and funds for manager Wayne Rooney in the January transfer window, but negotiations then collapsed"

...

which doesn't really make sense as it implies Ashley struck a deal with Mel for the club, not just the stadium.

It wasn't Morris' club to sell in December though! Any such deal was an impossibility in the first place so of course 'negotiations collapsed'.  I mean, come on, really Percy?

However it does says a lot about the snidey way Ashley is going about things, trying to influence the process without even entering it.

 

And the administrators confirmed way after this that THEY had not received any bids from Ashley. 

So either they are lying, or Ashley is feeding rubbish to reporters or going directly to Morris behind the administrators' backs or Percy is making things up. 

So, you pay your money and you make your choice of who you believe.

[Mostyn6]

25 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

It doesn't matter really as MA already has another collectors vinyl to see, he's not short of a bob or two and just likes a bargain to enjoy and later sell on. He manages to make lots of money on original 1st pressings, where other collectors have bought fakes and lose their money.

good luck to him then, that doesn't mean I should've entertained a derisory offer nor declined a better offer in the hope he'd come back with his derisory offer. Especially if I want my vinyl to go to a good home and not end up pinned to wall in his cellar bar, ultimately needing someone to buy them and repair.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

Here we go.  Should have put a better team out with 3 games to go to secure those points.  Always knew with free transfers, manager changes and big loans start of the season this was on the cards.  Another EFL headache of their own making. 

The Royals, who finished four points and one place above Posh, were deducted six points in November with a further six point deduction suspended in case the club make additional breaches.

The latest accounts published by Reading in February revealed pre-tax losses of £35.7m. The EFL only permit a maximum loss of £39m across three seasons.

McCann said: “There is something going on in the background with Reading which we are aware of, but it’s just a bit of hope more than anything. I don’t really want to go into it. You can never say never though.”

If there are further points deductions for Reading they are more likely to be imposed next season. The EFL took that course of action with Derby County which led to legal action from Wycombe Wanderers last season. Wycombe finished in 22nd place as Posh have done.

[TuffLuff]

28 minutes ago, angieram said:

And the administrators confirmed way after this that THEY had not received any bids from Ashley. 

So either they are lying, or Ashley is feeding rubbish to reporters or going directly to Morris behind the administrators' backs or Percy is making things up. 

So, you pay your money and you make your choice of who you believe.

Whilst I don’t really ignore any info that’s coming out over this be it Twitter rumours, Nixon or whoever…I don’t think Percy has covered himself in glory this last couple of years. 

Edited May 10, 2022 by TuffLuff

[Carnero]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

So, here is an interesting question for any us expecting Mel to hand over the stadium for free (or for less than the loan amount) AND repay the MSD loan? If we had been able to obtain the EFL loan (and therefore hopefully not require the MSD loan) would we now be looking for Mel to hand over the stadium for free AND repay the Covid loan as that effectively the same?

Excellent point.

[CornwallRam]

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

Everyone in the media, Q and the EFL saying ‘it’s the stadium’. Why?  The problem is there is simply not enough money in the bid to avoid a points deduction. 

If MM had sold the stadium to a subsidiary of the club, the club would ‘own’ it. But wouldn’t we be in exactly the same position, faced with CK’s bid : Not enough money to avoid a points deduction. I think so (but it’s quite a hard question ). 

CK is a bit of an illusion artist in how he has presented his bid. And it will force MM to write one last cheque...
 

(This wasn’t really a response to your comment about the EFL PdP, it was just a more, general vent. Hope you don’t mind me piggybacking  )

 

 

I still don't get how the numbers stack up around the points deduction. We don't owe much (in this context) to unsecured creditors. So the difference between 10% and 25% is likely to be in the region of £1m - which CK wouldn't consider as worth -15 surely?

It only becomes a significant if HMRC are classed as an unsecured creditor, but then figure for a takeover becomes a lot lower than is reported.

 

[JfR]

21 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

Here we go.  Should have put a better team out with 3 games to go to secure those points.  Always knew with free transfers, manager changes and big loans start of the season this was on the cards.  Another EFL headache of their own making. 

The Royals, who finished four points and one place above Posh, were deducted six points in November with a further six point deduction suspended in case the club make additional breaches.

The latest accounts published by Reading in February revealed pre-tax losses of £35.7m. The EFL only permit a maximum loss of £39m across three seasons.

McCann said: “There is something going on in the background with Reading which we are aware of, but it’s just a bit of hope more than anything. I don’t really want to go into it. You can never say never though.”

If there are further points deductions for Reading they are more likely to be imposed next season. The EFL took that course of action with Derby County which led to legal action from Wycombe Wanderers last season. Wycombe finished in 22nd place as Posh have done.

It's not really worth thinking about. Even if they do get further points deducted this season, we all know the EFL wouldn't have done it if it was us that would have profited from it.

[Red Ram]

3 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Yeah right. Who brought the charge against Derby then 4 years after signing off on the accounts and two years after signing off on the stadium sale? Who pursued the matter despite much of the allegations being thrown out and tried to get us relegated when at most the only sanction should have been a modest fine? Who indulged the Boro claim which could have bankrupted the club? Who has been briefing against us with multiple misleading statements and leaks to the press over the last two and a half years? Two and a half years during which one man has presided over the EFL the spiteful Parry. And two and half years of a continuing vendetta that has made it almost impossible to sell the club.

So much of this is factually incorrect it's hard to know where to start but here goes anyway:-

(1) The EFL don't sign off accounts - the club's auditors do. The independent panel found that Derby did not make their anomolous amortisation policy sufficiently clear at the time. That's why we were ultimately hit with a retrospective points deduction further down the line.

(2) We breached FFP in 3 of 4 consecutive periods. The sanction for this, according to EFL rules (that we signed up to!), is a points deduction. By the letter of the law the EFL could have legimately deducted between 14 and 17 points so we actually got off lightly with 9.

(3) There's no vendetta. Other clubs have also been hit with points deductions for breaching EFL rules e.g. Sheffield Wednesday, Wigan, Birmingham and Reading (and they also sing 'Duck the EFL'). Again, we signed up to these rules just like these other clubs did and they all knew the consequences of breaching them just like we did.

(4) The EFL were not in a position to do anything about the Boro (or Wycombe claim) - it was between the two clubs. It's unrealisic to except the EFL to take sides in a dispute between two member clubs. You're basically saying they should have taken Derby's side. The framework for football governance needs to be changed to prevent claims like Boro's being made going forward but that is not supported by the rules as they stand.

In summary, blaming the EFL is like blaming the breathlyser when you get done for drunk driving. It quite simply represents a complete failure to take responsibility for the club's own actions.

We may well be on the verge of liquidation. If this happens, this is down to our lifelong fan owner and no-one else.

Hopefully though, we are on the verge of a new era with Kirchner. He's on record as saying he wants a constructive relationship with the EFL. It's time to draw a line under this and stop blaming the EFL for Mel Morris's misdemeanours.

Let's not be that club any more. We're better than that. I sincerely hope...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rammeister]

54 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

I thought that was old news.

The issue was that CK didn't want Mel to have anything to do with the club, the same as me.

 

Why didn’t CK want you to have anything to do with the club???‍♂️

[Sparkle]

17 minutes ago, Red Ram said:

So much of this is factually incorrect it's hard to know where to start but here goes anyway:-

(1) The EFL don't sign off accounts - the club's auditors do. The independent panel found that Derby did not make their anomolous amortisation policy sufficiently clear at the time. That's why we were ultimately hit with a retrospective points deduction further down the line.

(2) We breached FFP in 3 of 4 consecutive periods. The sanction for this, according to EFL rules (that we signed up to!), is a points deduction. By the letter of the law the EFL could have legimately deducted between 14 and 17 points so we actually got off lightly with 9.

(3) There's no vendetta. Other clubs have also been hit with points deductions for breaching EFL rules e.g. Sheffield Wednesday, Wigan, Birmingham and Reading (and they also sing 'Duck the EFL'). Again, we signed up to these rules just like these other clubs did and they all knew the consequences of breaching them just like we did.

(4) The EFL were not in a position to do anything about the Boro (or Wycombe claim) - it was between the two clubs. It's unrealisic to except the EFL to take sides in a dispute between two member clubs. You're basically saying they should have taken Derby's side. The framework for football governance needs to be changed to prevent claims like Boro's being made going forward but that is not supported by the rules as they stand.

In summary, blaming the EFL is like blaming the breathlyser when you get done for drunk driving. It quite simply represents a complete failure to take responsibility for the club's own actions.

We may well be on the verge of liquidation. If this happens, this is down to our lifelong fan owner and no-one else.

Hopefully though, we are on the verge of a new era with Kirchner. He's on record as saying he wants a constructive relationship with the EFL. It's time to draw a line under this and stop blaming the EFL for Mel Morris's misdemeanours.

Let's not be that club any more. We're better than that. I sincerely hope...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There was and still is a vendetta thank you very much 

[RadioactiveWaste]

7 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

There was and still is a vendetta thank you very much 

It's impossible to quantify how much was vindictiveness, how much incompetence, how much influence the "held in abeyance" legal threat from Boro to the EFL had.

Whilst the ultimate responsibility is that of Mel Morris, it's perfectly legitimate to have some string feelings towards the EFL.

It's more like a criminal being got by a dirty cop.

[i-Ram]

2 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Everyone in the media, Q and the EFL saying ‘it’s the stadium’. Why?  The problem is there is simply not enough money in the bid to avoid a points deduction. 

If MM had sold the stadium to a subsidiary of the club, the club would ‘own’ it. But wouldn’t we be in exactly the same position, faced with CK’s bid : Not enough money to avoid a points deduction. I think so (but it’s quite a hard question ). 

CK is a bit of an illusion artist in how he has presented his bid. And it will force MM to write one last cheque...

(This wasn’t really a response to your comment about the EFL PdP, it was just a more, general vent. Hope you don’t mind me piggybacking  )

Morris couldn’t sell it to a subsidiary company of the club. He had created a huge FFP problem for the club, where the only way to escape a points penalty in 2018 was to sell the stadium at an arms length to himself as a ringfenced third party transaction.  If he hadn’t sold it to himself, or any other third party, he would have had a £41m hole in the accounts. As it turned out he was only kicking the can down the road.

[RammingStone66]

14 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

There was and still is a vendetta thank you very much 

Wow the insight ?

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

28 minutes ago, Red Ram said:

So much of this is factually incorrect it's hard to know where to start but here goes anyway:-

(1) The EFL don't sign off accounts - the club's auditors do. The independent panel found that Derby did not make their anomolous amortisation policy sufficiently clear at the time. That's why we were ultimately hit with a retrospective points deduction further down the line.

(2) We breached FFP in 3 of 4 consecutive periods. The sanction for this, according to EFL rules (that we signed up to!), is a points deduction. By the letter of the law the EFL could have legimately deducted between 14 and 17 points so we actually got off lightly with 9.

(3) There's no vendetta. Other clubs have also been hit with points deductions for breaching EFL rules e.g. Sheffield Wednesday, Wigan, Birmingham and Reading (and they also sing 'Duck the EFL'). Again, we signed up to these rules just like these other clubs did and they all knew the consequences of breaching them just like we did.

(4) The EFL were not in a position to do anything about the Boro (or Wycombe claim) - it was between the two clubs. It's unrealisic to except the EFL to take sides in a dispute between two member clubs. You're basically saying they should have taken Derby's side. The framework for football governance needs to be changed to prevent claims like Boro's being made going forward but that is not supported by the rules as they stand.

In summary, blaming the EFL is like blaming the breathlyser when you get done for drunk driving. It quite simply represents a complete failure to take responsibility for the club's own actions.

We may well be on the verge of liquidation. If this happens, this is down to our lifelong fan owner and no-one else.

Hopefully though, we are on the verge of a new era with Kirchner. He's on record as saying he wants a constructive relationship with the EFL. It's time to draw a line under this and stop blaming the EFL for Mel Morris's misdemeanours.

Let's not be that club any more. We're better than that. I sincerely hope...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I understood it, part of the rules for membership is that no club can sue another.  Pretty black and white.  With regards to the 9 point deduction received, the difference in amortisation had no rules and regulation with regard to our accounts and were not supported by 'rules as they stand' till a couple of months ago.  We were punished for a ruling which did not exist. 

[ramit]

Any News?

Keep It Together

Kee..

Writing Mel

I'm Fine

[i-Ram]

2 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

As @PistoldPete helpfully reminded us, the club only have the loan from MSD because we were unable to access the EFL Covid support loan. 

So, here is an interesting question for any us expecting Mel to hand over the stadium for free (or for less than the loan amount) AND repay the MSD loan? If we had been able to obtain the EFL loan (and therefore hopefully not require the MSD loan) would we now be looking for Mel to hand over the stadium for free AND repay the Covid loan as that effectively the same?

I’m sure I’ll get the usual “if my auntie had………” comments but I do think it’s a valid comparison.

If I remember correctly the COVID Loan that was available was £8.3m. The debt to MSD when he threw his keys on the table was £20m, and to HMRC some £25m plus, plus other debt of some £25m to football clubs, solicitors, charities, shopkeepers, and forum owners.

Mel Morris completely mismanaged our club, and it’s finances, and has never once put his had up and admitted his mistakes. He bought the club with a stadium, and it’s sale should go through with the stadium back in the club’s ownership. He should do the right thing, but after 8 years of failing miserably I won’t hold my breath.

Edited May 10, 2022 by i-Ram

[RipleyRich]

2 hours ago, dcfcreece1601 said:

How much is Morris being paid for the club? Then he wants another 22m on top after everything he has done? The audacity on that man

He isn't being paid anything for 3club. The sale fee is to pay creditors. The club itself has virtually no value.

[BucksRam]

To be honest, I'm passed the point of re-visiting what the EFL did or didn't do - I have my views, I've voiced them on here.  We just need to move on and hope that going forward CK (assuming and hoping the deal goes through) establishes a good relationship with them. And if the structure changes, with an independent regulator coming in then we abide by whatever rules that results in. The fact is we simply must never have a repeat of this. 

As for money owed here, money owed there, again, I'm now at the point I don't care.  Pretty sure too that CK, MM, the EFL and Q have all thrashed out the details down to the penny, and we're of course not privy to those conversations.  For me, why should I stress about things completely out of my control.  All I want is for the deal to be done, the club to exist and for us to move on. If, by the time I have my planned BBQ at the weekend, it is done, then I may upgrade my rump steak to a sirloin....heck I may even go T-Bone or Fillet.