The Administration Thread

[YouRams]

If we go under and come back as Derby City FC, Up The Sheep, does the gypsy curse die with the Rams and we might get some luck going forward? 

[Seth's left foot]

1 minute ago, YouRams said:

If we go under and come back as Derby City FC, Up The Sheep, does the gypsy curse die with the Rams and we might get some luck going forward? 

Is it a curse or just the fact that we’ve had a lot of d******** running the club over the years? 

[LeedsCityRam]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Maybe. Asking a Government minister to investigate newspapers speculation to see if it’s true sounds like a waste of time to me. 
 

And anyone who seriously thinks that q has ignored progressable bids is living in cloud cuckoo land. As for bids made in Dec , q made it clear none of the bidders wanted to take on liability for Boro claims. Is there any suggestion that isn’t true? If so I find a suggestion that q didn’t tell the truth about that extremely unlikely.

 

Its not just 'newspaper speculation' though is it? The journalists are being directly briefed by key parties & given the precise allegations and overall lack of faith in Quantuma from all sides, it makes sense that oversight being applied. Given the EFL are being held at arms' length by NDAs (and obviously being compromised by their past conduct), the relevant Government minister is the most appropriate authority to investigate any alledged impropriety.

If you're willing to take everything Quantuma say at face value, I think we'll have to agree to strongly disagree.

[TheDeadlySaul]

1 minute ago, YouRams said:

If we go under and come back as Derby City FC, Up The Sheep, does the gypsy curse die with the Rams and we might get some luck going forward? 

Knowing our luck the EFL probably have some clause where all gypsy curses must carry onto the successor club in the case of liquidation. 

[Gone]

I wonder if monthly DD will be an option this time for ST? I’m sure if it isn’t it’ll effect the total sales? 

[Ken Tram]

I presume that Derby will appear on the fixture list as things stand?

[Ghost of Clough]

4 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Latest supporter groups statement is misleading, inaccurate and in the case of BAWT, hypocritical.

Offers from Ashley or Appleby in December could not be progressed due to Boro claim and EFL approach to it. Surely every Rams fan knows this, yet not mentioned in the statement? After the Boro claim "accord" betwen SW and MM in February,  the way was clear for either Appleby or Ashley to close the deal. Why didn't they? Only in April did CK surface, and his was the only then compliant bid. The allegation that months were lost due to pursuit of CK is just false... although I agree better checks on his money could have been done.  But wasn't CK re-introduced to Q by Nigel Owen of BAWT?

And can someone tell me what the point of the supporter group statement was? It seems misguided and pointless as well as misleading.

The people composing those type of statements tend to:
a) not fully understand the situation
b) have an agenda against Quantuma 
c) both of the above

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The people composing those type of statements tend to:
a) not fully understand the situation
b) have an agenda against Quantuma 
c) both of the above

b) could be Ashley then? ?

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

8 minutes ago, YouRams said:

If we go under and come back as Derby City FC, Up The Sheep, does the gypsy curse die with the Rams and we might get some luck going forward? 

As long as there is Derby and County in the name. City is boring and would alienate people 

[atherstoneram]

19 minutes ago, roboto said:

I see it is now the time for some more half-baked puns.

Alright don't get a cob on.

[Curtains]

1 hour ago, Unlucky Alf said:

In a way Curtains I agree, But, If they think they can help with anything concerning football all's good, Remember the RPG(no not rocket propelled grenades)Rams Protest Group and the Red Cards, They had a great effect, They got a good majority of fans onboard, remember Jeremy Keith on radio Derby's interview when they challenged him earning £60k a year and him complaining that he had his Daughter in the car and he's not answering personal questions, The RPG did a sterling job and pretty sure they and others with the support of RamsTrust got them removed...eventually ? 

The problem we as supporters have is we aren’t really involved in decision making regarding DCFC .

I suppose we have to trust Club policy and that  ownership are acting in the best interests of the club so bringing the club and owners to account is a good thing done the right way .

Regarding-bringing Quantuma to account well that’s entirely different as they are answerable to the creditors and have to take them into account with a club in Administration.

The answering to fans is not their primary role although massively important.

Regulators should regulate Administrators as they have to be lawful in process.

 

Maybe Rams Trust asking for mediation from Government is a good thing though 

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

25 minutes ago, TheDeadlySaul said:

Knowing our luck the EFL probably have some clause where all gypsy curses must carry onto the successor club in the case of liquidation. 

Can someone just get hold of that DcFC voodoo doll and remove all the pins? Change it to a Forest doll or something. 

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

 Q's every action is under scrutiny. They are officers of the Court. They will not be influenced by anyone in fulfilling their legal duties, and they are obliged to report any conflicts of interest

Yeah I think the judge probably comes on here from time to time to check q are discharging their duties properly

you should do some research on the conflicts point (or the ‘drivel’, in your words) Easiest way to get up to speed is to look at the principles applying to IPs accepting appointments if they are major creditors.  

[Comrade 86]

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

Anyone worrying about season ticket money being 'lost' I think will be reassured by Q that the funds will probably be held in Escrow. The funds will be held in a ring fenced account, and fed into the football club on a monthly (or more frequent) basis as fixtures are fulfilled.

Q's immediate priorities are to secure some short term funding, get season tickets available for sale, complete some commercial deals (sponsorship, etc.), to prove to the EFL in a business case that they will have sufficient funds available for the forthcoming season. Without that the EFL are not going to let us compete, and/or buy or loan players. IF Q thought Appleby or Ashley, or anyone, was able to complete the purchase in the next week or two I am sure they would go for it, but that is highly unlikely. Hence their priority given the fact the season is some 5 and a bit weeks away is to make sure that we have EFL give approval for us to play next season. Once they have that assurance then Q will put their energies again into seeing if some buyer will come forward with bids (and cash) acceptable to keep Morris/MSD/HMRC/EFL happy.

Alright Facty McFactface, enough common sense and reasoning for one day. What this thread really needs is more folk venting their collective spleens. ?

[PistoldPete]

19 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Its not just 'newspaper speculation' though is it? The journalists are being directly briefed by key parties & given the precise allegations and overall lack of faith in Quantuma from all sides, it makes sense that oversight being applied. Given the EFL are being held at arms' length by NDAs (and obviously being compromised by their past conduct), the relevant Government minister is the most appropriate authority to investigate any alledged impropriety.

If you're willing to take everything Quantuma say at face value, I think we'll have to agree to strongly disagree.

I haven’t said I take everything q say at face value but if they said no bidder was willing to take on responsibility for Boro claims I have absolutely no reason to doubt that.

The allegation made by Ashley  is that they were told by q that he was preferred bidder. That was at a time when Boro claim was still current. Q thought they could deal with that claim in a certain way Efl had other ideas. Who was right Efl or q may be hotly disputed. Either way Ashley’s bid was not progressable without Boro claim being disposed of one way or another . Once it was why didn’t Ashley then proceed with his bid? 

As for Appleby claim, has he offered to pay June wages? If not his offer is not compliant as he claims because we will immediately be faced with a 3 point penalty and possibly much worse. 
 

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

Has Andrew Hoskings knobbed your Mrs in the past?

Another libellous post the mods choose to overlook. I can prove it’s untrue - that one said his name was Carl 

[Ambitious]

40 minutes ago, Ken Tram said:

I presume that Derby will appear on the fixture list as things stand?

I have a feeling that two fixture lists will be released, however nothing has been confirmed as of yet. 

[kevinhectoring]

52 minutes ago, Gritstone Tup said:

You’d think that trying to reduce Qs fees by £500,000 was neither here nor there in the bigger picture.

More than 500k. What if Ashley’s bid says: halve your fees and halve the legal fees you’ve wasted; and give that £ and some more to the unsecured creditors. Oh and I’ll withdraw my legal suit if I win. 
How does q react ?

Wish the EFL were on Q’s shoulder -  this would be fixed more quickly 

[Ramos]

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

There are suggestions Ashley has tried to force q to reduce fees - that might have been a reason he was derailed 

Also quite possible that Stretford and Rooney somehow forced q to re-open discussions with CK. (it’s notable how little we have heard from Rooney)

We’re now in the position where Q’s unpaid fees are so high they themselves have a conflict in continuing to act 

People keep saying Rooney is quiet but it’s off season - you wouldn’t usually hear from the manager and it’s not really up to him to keep commenting on a situation he isn’t actually privy too.  

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

12 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I haven’t said I take everything q say at face value but if they said no bidder was willing to take on responsibility for Boro claims I have absolutely no reason to doubt that.

The allegation made by Ashley  is that they were told by q that he was preferred bidder. That was at a time when Boro claim was still current. Q thought they could deal with that claim in a certain way Efl had other ideas. Who was right Efl or q may be hotly disputed. Either way Ashley’s bid was not progressable without Boro claim being disposed of one way or another . Once it was why didn’t Ashley then proceed with his bid? 

As for Appleby claim, has he offered to pay June wages? If not his offer is not compliant as he claims because we will immediately be faced with a 3 point penalty and possibly much worse. 
 

If Ashley was really that keen he would have bought the club by now. The issue with leaving it late to make a purchase of DCFC is it’s not like a normal business- performance on the field will be affected with points deductions, reduced squad etc.