The Administration Thread

[G STAR RAM]

Just now, LERam said:

Can I just ask how old you are?

I've met a lot of accountants in my job, and work directly with them including auditors

I haven't met one under 25 that actually knows what they are talking about in the real world, they've done a few trial balances and passed a couple of courses and think they are knowledgeable accountants ?

Just an end note, I don't know enough about Derby's accounts to argue with any of you about who is right or wrong, so I'm not calling anyone out unless you're an accountant under 25 ?

I'm 43 years old.

Worked in accountancy since the age of 17, was an auditor for about 10 of them years.

Moved out of accountancy practice and into industry where I have been for the last 10 years.

My knowledge of auditing has obviously waned in that time but I definitely still know the difference between a debtor and a creditor!

[jono]

1 hour ago, alram said:

oh dear, embarassing stuff

this is your answer to being proven wrong then. 

everything i have said is factually correct, spin it whatever way you want. facts are facts, if mel decides tomorrow actually i want that loan repaying, he's there on the unsecured creditors list

And all he would achieve (if you are right, and that is no way certain)  is killing the deal which = liquidation and getting nothing and still having the payments / security on a 20 million loan to cover. 

Edited June 19, 2022 by jono

[Tyler Durden]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

I'll await a list of what subjects can be debated on here...obviously only ones that you find interesting of course ?

Not really down to me is it 

If you had a little self awareness then you would realise by now that this protracted argument you're inflicting on people really should be now had via personal messenger or just canned full stop.

Fill your boots though. 

 

[plymouthram]

17 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

I think @G STAR RAM and @alram should find a pub car park conveniently near to both parties and sell tickets for a straightener which would be infinitely more interesting then the dour, pedantic tit for tat argument they're currently embroiled in.

Think the likelihood of this happening is about zero as they probably wouldn't even be able to agree to the location of the tear up.

#timetoletitgo

Would you turn up to be the Referee and could they use a Pub that sells Real ale. Please find out the date & time, pub venue and please make it a weekend so I can watch.     P.S. I'm willing to pay, after all the Ref needs funding

[LERam]

5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I'm 43 years old.

Worked in accountancy since the age of 17, was an auditor for about 10 of them years.

Moved out of accountancy practice and into industry where I have been for the last 10 years.

My knowledge of auditing has obviously waned in that time but I definitely still know the difference between a debtor and a creditor!

Close to my age, you pass the test 

[RoyMac5]

 

"Thank you for your email. We also note Trevor Birch’s response on behalf of the EFL.

Firstly, it is very important to state that we absolutely understand the frustration and distress of the fans, particularly since the turn of the year. We receive a huge quantity of correspondence daily and are also aware of the considerable press reporting and social media activity. Clearly, some of the reports have been closer to the truth than others.

Before a sale is finalised, there is an immediate requirement to secure the short-term future of the club, to allow players to be signed, issue season tickets for sale and to secure commercial agreements, as well as our best intentions to bring the uncertainty for staff and supporters to an end as soon as possible.

Once the short-term future of the club is secured, the minimum requirements for a bidder to be referred to the EFL for consideration are:

Bidders to submit offers that pay football creditors in full, pay 25p in the £ to other creditors (or 35p in the £ over 3 years) and propose a suitable solution for the club’s ongoing occupation of the stadium.

If such offers are not received, the next possibility is for offers that pay football creditors in full and propose a suitable solution for the club’s ongoing occupation of the stadium. In this scenario, where less than 25p in the £ is paid to other creditors, a 15-point deduction would be imposed for next season (depending on when a sale completes).

If neither 1) nor 2) is met, then it is unclear what position the EFL will take.

In either scenario 1) or 2) the costs of the administration need to be settled. The vast majority of these costs are the ongoing trading losses that the club sustains on a monthly basis and within that the biggest cost by a distance is payroll and associated costs. The options the administrators had to reduce costs were to make widespread redundancies, sell more first team players in the January transfer window and reduce the club’s Category 1 Academy status. It was decided not to do so in order to maintain the club in as strong a position as possible for a buyer and to give the first the team the best possible chance of avoiding relegation. It has been to date, and remains, extremely challenging managing cash flow each month in what remains a heavily loss-making business. Contrary to speculation Quantuma has not drawn any fees to date. The basis of drawing fees is set out in the joint administrators’ proposals report that was issued in November. It has not changed since, although considerable time costs have been incurred which will not be fully recovered. It is not in Quantuma’s interests financially, to allow the administration to become unnecessarily protracted nor for the companies to be placed into liquidation.

We are having extremely positive and productive discussions with interested parties in relation to the short-term requirements and are confident of those discussions leading to a sale thereafter which will secure the club’s long-term future. We do not, however, believe that imposing ‘hard deadlines’ are the answer at this stage. You will recall that we imposed deadlines earlier in the process which were not adhered to by bidders. We were then heavily criticised for extending those deadlines. In reality, no bids were received that were suitable to be recommended to the EFL for approval i.e. none that fell into category 1 or 2 above. Had we not extended the deadlines the alternative would have been to place the club into liquidation at that stage which no fan wants. We agreed with the EFL that we would report to them once we received a bid that satisfied 1) or 2) above, which Chris Kirchner’s bid did. Now that Mr Kirchner’s bid has been withdrawn, we will again report to the EFL upon receipt of a bid that satisfies 1) or 2).

We are bound by confidentiality agreements and so we cannot release the identities of the parties who have come forward, nor can we release any detail in relation to their interest or bids. However, all interested parties know that it is in their interests to be in situ as soon as possible in order for them to put together a competitive playing squad and secure valuable commercial contracts whilst giving staff and fans certainty for the future. The club does not have the luxury of time, and so, even without hard deadlines, the club’s future must be secured very soon.

Further to the EFL’s statement last week we fully understand their need to ensure that Derby County FC can fulfil its fixtures next season for the integrity of the league competition. As confirmed by Trevor Birch we are having daily calls with the EFL to provide updates on progress and that will continue for as long as is necessary and appropriate. As ever, any prospective owner of Derby County FC will be subject to EFL approval and will be required to satisfy the Owners’ and Directors’ Test. Once funding is confirmed for the duration of the season, we will be able to discuss with the EFL the terms of any business plan. Very positive discussions regarding funding and the sale of the club are ongoing.

Kind regards

Carl Jackson & Andrew Hosking
Joint Administrators of The Derby County Football Club Limited and associated companies "

Edited June 19, 2022 by RoyMac5

[RadioactiveWaste]

Genuine question,but is the perception of accountants as petty, mean spirited, tightfisted, bean counters entirely undeserved?

I can only really speak from experience of "yes, the ground investigation works cost more than we'd put in our proposal but the project has come in showing a profit. No, we can't know what we're going to find when we get to site, hence the "investigation" in "ground investigation"

And "are you really that fussed about that lunch receipt for £7.19 at Burger King at Cannock Richard services?"

But obviously, it's probably not representative of an entire profession....

[G STAR RAM]

7 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Not really down to me is it 

If you had a little self awareness then you would realise by now that this protracted argument you're inflicting on people really should be now had via personal messenger or just canned full stop.

Fill your boots though. 

Yeah guess its not that important whether our club owes MM £123m or not.

Not inflicting anything upon you, there is a facility to put other posters on ignore if you don't want to read what they are posting.

I'd suggest thats a better option than trying to tell people what they can/cannot post.

[B4ev6is]

13 minutes ago, LERam said:

Can I just ask how old you are?

I've met a lot of accountants in my job, and work directly with them including auditors

I haven't met one under 25 that actually knows what they are talking about in the real world, they've done a few trial balances and passed a couple of courses and think they are knowledgeable accountants ?

Just an end note, I don't know enough about Derby's accounts to argue with any of you about who is right or wrong, so I'm not calling anyone out unless you're an accountant under 25 ?

Not me

I dont have a clue how to work them out thank god give me a brain arche.

[G STAR RAM]

5 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Genuine question,but is the perception of accountants as petty, mean spirited, tightfisted, bean counters entirely undeserved?

I can only really speak from experience of "yes, the ground investigation works cost more than we'd put in our proposal but the project has come in showing a profit. No, we can't know what we're going to find when we get to site, hence the "investigation" in "ground investigation"

And "are you really that fussed about that lunch receipt for £7.19 at Burger King at Cannock Richard services?"

But obviously, it's probably not representative of an entire profession....

When I started out in accountancy that was definitely the case!

Think there has been a shift over the last 20 years though. 

[Tyler Durden]

5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yeah guess its not that important whether our club owes MM £123m or not.

Not inflicting anything upon you, there is a facility to put other posters on ignore if you don't want to read what they are posting.

I'd suggest thats a better option than trying to tell people what they can/cannot post.

 

[maxjam]

5 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

"Thank you for your email. We also note Trevor Birch’s response on behalf of the EFL.

Firstly, it is very important to state that we absolutely understand the frustration and distress of the fans, particularly since the turn of the year. We receive a huge quantity of correspondence daily and are also aware of the considerable press reporting and social media activity. Clearly, some of the reports have been closer to the truth than others.

Before a sale is finalised, there is an immediate requirement to secure the short-term future of the club, to allow players to be signed, issue season tickets for sale and to secure commercial agreements, as well as our best intentions to bring the uncertainty for staff and supporters to an end as soon as possible.

Once the short-term future of the club is secured, the minimum requirements for a bidder to be referred to the EFL for consideration are:

Bidders to submit offers that pay football creditors in full, pay 25p in the £ to other creditors (or 35p in the £ over 3 years) and propose a suitable solution for the club’s ongoing occupation of the stadium.

If such offers are not received, the next possibility is for offers that pay football creditors in full and propose a suitable solution for the club’s ongoing occupation of the stadium. In this scenario, where less than 25p in the £ is paid to other creditors, a 15-point deduction would be imposed for next season (depending on when a sale completes).

If neither 1) nor 2) is met, then it is unclear what position the EFL will take.

In either scenario 1) or 2) the costs of the administration need to be settled. The vast majority of these costs are the ongoing trading losses that the club sustains on a monthly basis and within that the biggest cost by a distance is payroll and associated costs. The options the administrators had to reduce costs were to make widespread redundancies, sell more first team players in the January transfer window and reduce the club’s Category 1 Academy status. It was decided not to do so in order to maintain the club in as strong a position as possible for a buyer and to give the first the team the best possible chance of avoiding relegation. It has been to date, and remains, extremely challenging managing cash flow each month in what remains a heavily loss-making business. Contrary to speculation Quantuma has not drawn any fees to date. The basis of drawing fees is set out in the joint administrators’ proposals report that was issued in November. It has not changed since, although considerable time costs have been incurred which will not be fully recovered. It is not in Quantuma’s interests financially, to allow the administration to become unnecessarily protracted nor for the companies to be placed into liquidation.

We are having extremely positive and productive discussions with interested parties in relation to the short-term requirements and are confident of those discussions leading to a sale thereafter which will secure the club’s long-term future. We do not, however, believe that imposing ‘hard deadlines’ are the answer at this stage. You will recall that we imposed deadlines earlier in the process which were not adhered to by bidders. We were then heavily criticised for extending those deadlines. In reality, no bids were received that were suitable to be recommended to the EFL for approval i.e. none that fell into category 1 or 2 above. Had we not extended the deadlines the alternative would have been to place the club into liquidation at that stage which no fan wants. We agreed with the EFL that we would report to them once we received a bid that satisfied 1) or 2) above, which Chris Kirchner’s bid did. Now that Mr Kirchner’s bid has been withdrawn, we will again report to the EFL upon receipt of a bid that satisfies 1) or 2).

We are bound by confidentiality agreements and so we cannot release the identities of the parties who have come forward, nor can we release any detail in relation to their interest or bids. However, all interested parties know that it is in their interests to be in situ as soon as possible in order for them to put together a competitive playing squad and secure valuable commercial contracts whilst giving staff and fans certainty for the future. The club does not have the luxury of time, and so, even without hard deadlines, the club’s future must be secured very soon.

Further to the EFL’s statement last week we fully understand their need to ensure that Derby County FC can fulfil its fixtures next season for the integrity of the league competition. As confirmed by Trevor Birch we are having daily calls with the EFL to provide updates on progress and that will continue for as long as is necessary and appropriate. As ever, any prospective owner of Derby County FC will be subject to EFL approval and will be required to satisfy the Owners’ and Directors’ Test. Once funding is confirmed for the duration of the season, we will be able to discuss with the EFL the terms of any business plan. Very positive discussions regarding funding and the sale of the club are ongoing.

Kind regards

Carl Jackson & Andrew Hosking
Joint Administrators of The Derby County Football Club Limited and associated companies "

Good communication for a change - although I wish I hadn't read it!

The only bid we've received that met the 2 criteria laid out has been withdrawn and its getting late in the day now for another - especially as costs keep rising.

We need someone to move quickly with a substantial bid otherwise the EFL will be flexing their muscles ? 

[Topram]

12 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

"Thank you for your email. We also note Trevor Birch’s response on behalf of the EFL.

Firstly, it is very important to state that we absolutely understand the frustration and distress of the fans, particularly since the turn of the year. We receive a huge quantity of correspondence daily and are also aware of the considerable press reporting and social media activity. Clearly, some of the reports have been closer to the truth than others.

Before a sale is finalised, there is an immediate requirement to secure the short-term future of the club, to allow players to be signed, issue season tickets for sale and to secure commercial agreements, as well as our best intentions to bring the uncertainty for staff and supporters to an end as soon as possible.

Once the short-term future of the club is secured, the minimum requirements for a bidder to be referred to the EFL for consideration are:

Bidders to submit offers that pay football creditors in full, pay 25p in the £ to other creditors (or 35p in the £ over 3 years) and propose a suitable solution for the club’s ongoing occupation of the stadium.

If such offers are not received, the next possibility is for offers that pay football creditors in full and propose a suitable solution for the club’s ongoing occupation of the stadium. In this scenario, where less than 25p in the £ is paid to other creditors, a 15-point deduction would be imposed for next season (depending on when a sale completes).

If neither 1) nor 2) is met, then it is unclear what position the EFL will take.

In either scenario 1) or 2) the costs of the administration need to be settled. The vast majority of these costs are the ongoing trading losses that the club sustains on a monthly basis and within that the biggest cost by a distance is payroll and associated costs. The options the administrators had to reduce costs were to make widespread redundancies, sell more first team players in the January transfer window and reduce the club’s Category 1 Academy status. It was decided not to do so in order to maintain the club in as strong a position as possible for a buyer and to give the first the team the best possible chance of avoiding relegation. It has been to date, and remains, extremely challenging managing cash flow each month in what remains a heavily loss-making business. Contrary to speculation Quantuma has not drawn any fees to date. The basis of drawing fees is set out in the joint administrators’ proposals report that was issued in November. It has not changed since, although considerable time costs have been incurred which will not be fully recovered. It is not in Quantuma’s interests financially, to allow the administration to become unnecessarily protracted nor for the companies to be placed into liquidation.

We are having extremely positive and productive discussions with interested parties in relation to the short-term requirements and are confident of those discussions leading to a sale thereafter which will secure the club’s long-term future. We do not, however, believe that imposing ‘hard deadlines’ are the answer at this stage. You will recall that we imposed deadlines earlier in the process which were not adhered to by bidders. We were then heavily criticised for extending those deadlines. In reality, no bids were received that were suitable to be recommended to the EFL for approval i.e. none that fell into category 1 or 2 above. Had we not extended the deadlines the alternative would have been to place the club into liquidation at that stage which no fan wants. We agreed with the EFL that we would report to them once we received a bid that satisfied 1) or 2) above, which Chris Kirchner’s bid did. Now that Mr Kirchner’s bid has been withdrawn, we will again report to the EFL upon receipt of a bid that satisfies 1) or 2).

We are bound by confidentiality agreements and so we cannot release the identities of the parties who have come forward, nor can we release any detail in relation to their interest or bids. However, all interested parties know that it is in their interests to be in situ as soon as possible in order for them to put together a competitive playing squad and secure valuable commercial contracts whilst giving staff and fans certainty for the future. The club does not have the luxury of time, and so, even without hard deadlines, the club’s future must be secured very soon.

Further to the EFL’s statement last week we fully understand their need to ensure that Derby County FC can fulfil its fixtures next season for the integrity of the league competition. As confirmed by Trevor Birch we are having daily calls with the EFL to provide updates on progress and that will continue for as long as is necessary and appropriate. As ever, any prospective owner of Derby County FC will be subject to EFL approval and will be required to satisfy the Owners’ and Directors’ Test. Once funding is confirmed for the duration of the season, we will be able to discuss with the EFL the terms of any business plan. Very positive discussions regarding funding and the sale of the club are ongoing.

Kind regards

Carl Jackson & Andrew Hosking
Joint Administrators of The Derby County Football Club Limited and associated companies "

God it sounds like back in September when they first started ?

[Tyler Durden]

12 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Genuine question,but is the perception of accountants as petty, mean spirited, tightfisted, bean counters entirely undeserved?

You left out pedantic, narrow minded, petty, boring and tedious ?

Edited June 19, 2022 by Tyler Durden

[RadioactiveWaste]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

When I started out in accountancy that was definitely the case!

Think there has been a shift over the last 20 years though. 

Im glad to hear it.

I asked because it's easy to get a very one sided and probably unfair view when your interactions are infrequently and usually because someone's taken issue with your work. I suspect in the company I used to work for it was a bit of a cultural thing TBH with accounts.

 

 

[G STAR RAM]

Just now, Tyler Durden said:

You left out pedantic, narrow minded, petty, boring and tedious. 

As I said, the profession has changed over the last 20 years.

Like most professions, accountancy has a lot of spotty students that come out of university and think they know everything because they know some long words...

 

[Tyler Durden]

And to save the day @RoyMac5 leaps in with another Tweet from his random collection of Twitterati sources, was beginning to go cold turkey as hadn't seen any posted for at least 2 hours ?

[CBRammette]

9 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Genuine question,but is the perception of accountants as petty, mean spirited, tightfisted, bean counters entirely undeserved?

I can only really speak from experience of "yes, the ground investigation works cost more than we'd put in our proposal but the project has come in showing a profit. No, we can't know what we're going to find when we get to site, hence the "investigation" in "ground investigation"

And "are you really that fussed about that lunch receipt for £7.19 at Burger King at Cannock Richard services?"

But obviously, it's probably not representative of an entire profession....

Yes it is undeserved to say that about a whole profession - same as I am sure all builders arent tax dodging mysogynistic layabouts who yell at women out of vans and all football fans arent beer swilling hooligans wearing football shirts 3 sizes too small with loads of tattoos.

And accountants are only bothered about your Burger King receipt because HMRC would be bothered about it. 

[RoyMac5]

Just now, Tyler Durden said:

And to save the day @RoyMac5 leaps in with another Tweet from his random collection of Twitterati sources, was beginning to go cold turkey as hadn't seen any posted for at least 2 hours ?

Good init. Lots of words, little meaning. #COYR

[Tyler Durden]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

As I said, the profession has changed over the last 20 years.

Like most professions, accountancy has a lot of spotty students that come out of university and think they know everything because they know some long words...

 

I went to Uni with a guy who did a Physics degree who went on to train as an actuary.

I can't think of anything else positive to say about him ?

This was about 25 years ago mind.....