The Administration Thread

[RamBeauIV]

11 hours ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

Why can’t we name PB? Not sure I get it.

Even if none of the interested parties have offered as much as Q would like, why can’t the best of them be the PB?

Does this mean we have actually NO BIDS at all or if there are then they are with possibly unworkable strings attached which makes them in effect not a bid at all.

Q said on Thursday "...the EFL have made it clear that any offer the joint administrators accept must satisfy football creditors in full in order to even consider the golden share transfer."

Why state the obvious?  If the bids (formal or informal) don't even meet that level, then Q can't really name a PB that is guaranteeing our expulsion from the EFL.

It's better if Q can have a bit of time to edge the "quantum of credible bids up" to meeting the absolute minimum that will satisfy the EFL.

[Tyler Durden]

10 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

If I were Q I would be getting irritated by the groups interested. I would be (belatedly) upping my PR game; I would be (very carefully) leaking stories to the press; I would be taking a risk and putting Wayne in front of them directly to emphasise the footballing issues; I would, now, define the end date, the point of liquidation and I would engage the EFL in that strategy. In short I would be increasing the pressure on them to make formal offers and move the process forward, quicker. 

How exactly are Quantuma going to be able to make an interested party submit a formal offer for the club nevermind compel the same party to make that bid sufficient to satisfy the EFLs creditors requirements? 

I don't see what leverage Quantuma have at all. Its out of their hands. We're now totally reliant on buyers thinking it's a good enough punt to spend their money on, Quantuma can't polish the turd which Morris left them to deal with. 

[Animal is a Ram]

Yes, yes, I know who it is.  and then there's this line from him too:

Quote

Thompson is on the 366 Group’s books, who are involved in trying to buy the Rams.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/18150128/derby-man-city-tottenham-thompson/

So Rush is still sniffing around, part of the Appleby group, if I'm not mistaken? Interestingly enough, they also have a former Ram on their about page - Matt Oakley. 

Edited April 3, 2022 by Animal is a Ram

[curb]

1 minute ago, Tyler Durden said:

How exactly are Quantuma going to be able to make an interested party submit a formal offer for the club nevermind compel the same party to make that bid sufficient to satisfy the EFLs creditors requirements? 

I don't see what leverage Quantuma have at all. Its out of their hands. We're now totally reliant on buyers thinking it's a good enough punt to spend their money on, Quantuma can't polish the turd which Morris left them to deal with. 

Because if whoever is bidding for the club is not offering enough to pay football creditors and HMRC, so not satisfying the EFL to keep the league membership, then the bid is effectively worthless. They may as well wait and start up a new company and buy the name and history.

[Tyler Durden]

2 minutes ago, curb said:

Because if whoever is bidding for the club is not offering enough to pay football creditors and HMRC, so not satisfying the EFL to keep the league membership, then the bid is effectively worthless. They may as well wait and start up a new company and buy the name and history.

Yes my point was again its not within Quantumas gift to compel a third party to make a formal bid for the club. So Quantuma really are passengers in all of this.

The only way to make the club more attractive is for Morris to chuck in the ground for a nominal amount in the deal. Which again is naff all to do with Quantuma. 

[DavesaRam]

20 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

It's actually Notts County's third away kit. We won it in a raffle. 

Apparently the charity who raffled the Notts County shirts are taking Derby County to court, claiming that the shirts are football shirts, making this a football debt. And as such they are due 100% of the price of the raffle ticket.

Quantuma’s response was to say that for that much money they might as well have the entire club.

[RipleyRich]

6 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Yes, yes, I know who it is. 

I can see some objection and outcry if that`s true. Council cutting services due to underfunding etc etc

[curb]

1 minute ago, Tyler Durden said:

Yes my point was again its not within Quantumas gift to compel a third party to make a formal bid for the club. So Quantuma really are passengers in all of this.

The only way to make the club more attractive is for Morris to chuck in the ground for a nominal amount in the deal. Which again is naff all to do with Quantuma. 

I guess the only way then is to say that time is running out.

With the time frame now, whoever becomes PB will have to keep the club running until the takeover is complete.

Another complicated complication.

[Tyler Durden]

1 minute ago, curb said:

I guess the only way then is to say that time is running out.

With the time frame now, whoever becomes PB will have to keep the club running until the takeover is complete.

Another complicated complication.

Which the potential bidders would be patently aware of anyway. 

We're sitting ducks atm at the pure whim of random business people whom may or may not decide to up their interest in us. 

[curb]

3 minutes ago, RipleyRich said:

I can see some objection and outcry if that`s true. Council cutting services due to underfunding etc etc

I’m not sure that’s true, most people in Derby/Derbyshire will realise the benefit to the county in keeping the football club going, and securing the stadium so it can’t be used like this again.

It would be more benefit than building a velodrome, how much did that cost?

[Gaspode]

5 minutes ago, curb said:

Because if whoever is bidding for the club is not offering enough to pay football creditors and HMRC, so not satisfying the EFL to keep the league membership, then the bid is effectively worthless. They may as well wait and start up a new company and buy the name and history.

That's my biggest concern at the moment. We're hurtling towards the end of the season - at that point, the money will run out and there's a high probability that Q will admit they haven't got a buyer who will meet the minimum cost and we'll be liquidated.

Potential buyers have to consider the scanrios:

1. Buy now - Next year in League One, with virtually no players, minus 15 points (so another potential relegation) and subject to 2 years of EFL business plans (interfering) before they can begin to properly rebuild; or
2. Wait for liquidation - get whatever is left on the cheap, offer Morris a fraction of his demands for the ground (as it is pretty worthless without a team to play there) and start afresh in whatever league we can get into....

Option 2 may be the better option in terms of a long-term rebuild - and that's ignoring how much cheaper it could potentially be for the buyer - a sorry situation, but one the potentuiial buyers will be considering based on their heads rather than their hearts....

 

[Tyler Durden]

13 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Yes, yes, I know who it is.  and then there's this line from him too:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/18150128/derby-man-city-tottenham-thompson/

So Rush is still sniffing around, part of the Appleby group, if I'm not mistaken? Interestingly enough, they also have a former Ram on their about page - Matt Oakley. 

Nottingham City Council own Forests ground don't they and presumably charge them a ground rent?

Dunno how popular it would be for the local council to spend taxpayers money on a football ground and whether that would have to be voted in by the council I know nothing about regulatory affairs at that level. 

[RipleyRich]

3 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Nottingham City Council own Forests ground don't they and presumably charge them a ground rent?

Dunno how popular it would be for the local council to spend taxpayers money on a football ground and whether that would have to be voted in by the council I know nothing about regulatory affairs at that level. 

No. Forest own the actual ground, but lease the land from the Council. Bit like Moor Farm arrangement with Locko estate.

[Tyler Durden]

3 minutes ago, RipleyRich said:

No. Forest own the actual ground, but lease the land from the Council. Bit like Moor Farm arrangement with Locko estate.

Yes that's what I meant sort of.

So would mean council buying the ground off Morris. Legally would that have to go to a vote?

Nottingham City Council are a million miles in debt dunno how flush with cash Derby City Council are. 

[nottingram]

6 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Nottingham City Council own Forests ground don't they and presumably charge them a ground rent?

Dunno how popular it would be for the local council to spend taxpayers money on a football ground and whether that would have to be voted in by the council I know nothing about regulatory affairs at that level. 

You would like to think most people would realise the economic benefits of having a stadium that attracts conservatively 20,000 people into the area 23 times a year. Probably make that 5,000 coming from outside the city of Derby itself.

[atherstoneram]

12 minutes ago, RipleyRich said:

I can see some objection and outcry if that`s true. Council cutting services due to underfunding etc etc

It would get really political if the council got involved in buying the club especially (if i remember correctly) as the leader of Derby City Council is a season ticket holder. As you say with public services underfunded it would be a hot potato.

 

[Jimbo Ram]

28 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Yes, yes, I know who it is.  and then there's this line from him too:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/18150128/derby-man-city-tottenham-thompson/

So Rush is still sniffing around, part of the Appleby group, if I'm not mistaken? Interestingly enough, they also have a former Ram on their about page - Matt Oakley. 

Can’t see how MPs are involved ?

[Ram-Alf]

16 minutes ago, curb said:

I’m not sure that’s true, most people in Derby/Derbyshire will realise the benefit to the county in keeping the football club going, and securing the stadium so it can’t be used like this again.

It would be more benefit than building a velodrome, how much did that cost?

Derby City Council: Operator: Derby City Council: Capacity: 1,700 (velodrome) 5,000 (concerts) Field size: 250 metres: Surface: Siberian pine (velodrome) Construction; Broke ground: 2012: Built: 2012–2015: Opened: 19 March 2015: Construction cost: £27 million: Architect: FaulknerBrowns: Project manager: Mace: Main contractors: Bowmer & Kirkland: Tenants; Team Derby (2014–2015)

[TuffLuff]

21 minutes ago, RipleyRich said:

I can see some objection and outcry if that`s true. Council cutting services due to underfunding etc etc

If the council lose Derby County they lose a major part of the city’s culture and identity. Also businesses lose out because opposition fans aren’t coming to the city etc etc etc

There’s a lot of balancing out, but this scenario does atleast make some sense 

[Tyler Durden]

5 minutes ago, nottingram said:

You would like to think most people would realise the economic benefits of having a stadium that attracts conservatively 20,000 people into the area 23 times a year. Probably make that 5,000 coming from outside the city of Derby itself.

That's why was asking would it be a unilateral decision by the leader of the council or would be subject to a council vote.

If the money being asked was going to be diverted away from other council spending then would be unpopular of course. 

Edited April 3, 2022 by Tyler Durden