The Administration Thread

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, Leeds Ram said:

Haven't there also been reports of the administrators telling players if they want to leave they can? certainly a different policy that was going on a few days ago. 

According to the Daily Fail that has been said! I'd suggest the Fail are just using the fact that lots of our squad are out of contract at seasons end and can negotiate a new deal from January - if they want.

[Leeds Ram]

Just now, RoyMac5 said:

According to the Daily Fail that has been said! I'd suggest the Fail are just using the fact that lots of our squad are out of contract at seasons end and can negotiate a new deal from January - if they want.

It makes sense if the takeover has been indefinitely delayed by the EFL then they'll need to keep the club running on some form of revenue and the easiest way that happens is with player sales. I'd imagine the only other option is another loan but surely they'd be concerns about our potential viability due to these problems.

[LeedsCityRam]

32 minutes ago, Indy said:

Does anyone know how quickly an injunction can be served? And what might it allow? Would it enable naming the preferred bidder, taking on the deposit, exiting administration and paying creditors? Could it compel the EFL to substantiate any attempt to not register players (a restraint of trade)?

In theory an interim injunction can be granted immediately. A final injunction could be reached in as little as a week or two.

Protection of business & upholding the law would definitely be two grounds on which an injunction could be sought & yes, courts can compel any organisation or persons to either refrain from certain actions or compel them to undertake a certain action. 

[Ramarena]

The EFL have destroyed the integrity of the division. Whether it’s:

- The EFL force us into relegation by restricting our squad.

- we liquidate the club

They have set a chain of events in motion.

This season all results against our team can be bought into question by any club, as EFL are forcing our club to put out an increasingly depleted team.

They have also opened the door to legal challenges when clubs don’t like final standings.

The division is dead in the water!

 

[SBW]

Re: the notion of not selling players because it devalues the club for the potential buyer.

Considering League One in almost a certainty, the players whose contracts expire this summer don't really add too much value, as a good number of them will likely walk anyway over playing in League 1.

Shinnie, Byrne and Lawrence for example will have offers at this level on frees, and will get more money in doing so.  Each of those could be sold now, and even if it only brought in a modest £1-2m, that'd likely also be a monthly saving over probably over 200k.  Contracts expire July 1st.  So that's just over £1m saved, plus whatever is gained in fees.  There's very little lost value to a new owner as mentioned above, so it makes sense.

Anyone whose contract expires post 2022 is a different story, and I agree it makes much more sense to sell once out of admin.  (there's a few who wont want League One) 

Another options is loan out some, like Jozwiak, who will have loan suitors, save his wages get a modest loan fee, and if he does well, he may well boosts his value for a non-admin sale anyway? 

 

The query I have is around those whose contracts are up summer 2022, but there is an option to extend.  Do the EFL have any control over optional extensions?  Can they withhold them?  Because then you're looking at the likes of Buchanan? Plange? Williams? Watson? being at risk of walking in the summer for poor compensation fees. 

[PistoldPete]

2 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

In theory an interim injunction can be granted immediately. A final injunction could be reached in as little as a week or two.

Protection of business & upholding the law would definitely be two grounds on which an injunction could be sought & yes, courts can compel any organisation or persons to either refrain from certain actions or compel them to undertake a certain action. 

Let's do it. 

[CornwallRam]

10 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

No, read their latest statement from this evening.

Have you got a link?

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

Have you got a link?

https://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/2022/01/a-statement-from-the-joint-administrators-of-Derby-county-football-club

Quote

Whilst we have a number of options as to how that funding can be delivered, we are not, today, in a position to finalise this funding however we do believe this will be finalised in the coming weeks.

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by RoyMac5

[Ram-Alf]

2 minutes ago, SBW said:

.
 

 

The query I have is around those whose contracts are up summer 2022, but there is an option to extend.  Do the EFL have any control over optional extensions?  Can they withhold them?  Because then you're looking at the likes of Buchanan? Plange? Williams? Watson? being at risk of walking in the summer for poor compensation fees. 

Didn't Marriott have the option of an extra year and the EFL threw it out?

[SBW]

1 minute ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Didn't Marriott have the option of an extra year and the EFL threw it out?

Yeah, that was going through my mind whilst typing, I *think* that was because his weekly wage was over the embargo limit, however. 

[Crewton]

2 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Didn't Marriott have the option of an extra year and the EFL threw it out?

Yes. They achieved great value for the creditors there, didn't they? 

I couldn't have more contempt for these ricks if someone paid me. 

[SBW]

1 minute ago, Crewton said:

Yes. They achieved great value for the creditors there, didn't they? 

I couldn't have more contempt for these ricks if someone paid me. 

Refusing that extension is probably the only help they've given through this whole drama to be fair ?

[PistoldPete]

19 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

The statement struck me as more desperate in terms of trying to get the EFL to the table than anything else if I'm honest. It's alright having 3 bids but if the EFL keep holding this up, the compensation claims keep hanging around and the combination of telling players they're free to go it strikes me as a pretty bleak picture in the immediate term. If we can't get the EFL to back off and those parasites to fu** off then we're surely in real trouble of not being able to continue as an entity?

I think the EFL statement came across as the desperate one.

The compensation claims are just of nuisance value more than anything. 

The admin team have a duty to act on behalf of the creditors. They clearly do not regard Boro and Wycombe as creditors. And they should know about these things. They are clear about the legal position so there should be no need for a fire sale which would be very damaging for our finances. 

The good thing is that the admin team have made it now in the open what I have been suspecting for some time.. they don't seem to be getting on with EFL any better than Morris did.. they have just been more polite and subtle about their differences.

 

But now they are calling out the EFL for the duck jobs that they are.   And rightly so. 

 

[PistoldPete]

3 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Yes. They achieved great value for the creditors there, didn't they? 

I couldn't have more contempt for these ricks if someone paid me. 

Don't mention Ricks. I think of Rick Parry. Or *rick 'Arry. 

[Indy]

2 minutes ago, SBW said:

Refusing that extension is probably the only help they've given through this whole drama to be fair ?

I thought we were extending it so that we could get a fee for him, knowing that clubs were interested in taking him.  

[SBW]

3 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I think the EFL statement came across as the desperate one.

The compensation claims are just of nuisance value more than anything. 

The admin team have a duty to act on behalf of the creditors. They clearly do not regard Boro and Wycombe as creditors. And they should know about these things. They are clear about the legal position so there should be no need for a fire sale which would be very damaging for our finances. 

The good thing is that the admin team have made it now in the open what I have been suspecting for some time.. they don't seem to be getting on with EFL any better than Morris did.. they have just been more polite and subtle about their differences.

 

But now they are calling out the EFL for the duck jobs that they are.   And rightly so. 

 

I agree that an all out 'fire sale' would be bad for business.

 

But selling Byrne, Shinnie, Lawrence and other out of contract players is good business sense in the circumstances.  They're going to undeniably walk in the summer anyway.  So at the minute, they're assisting with a fight that is filled with pride, although looking forlorn, and taking out significant money each week from the club.

 

Selling would bring in much needed money to keep the lights on, and save money in salary at the same time.   I feel that selling these players was being avoided because of the hope of staying up.  Jags, Baldock leaving and no incomings makes it look very bleak.  I think there's a decision to be made for the better long-term future of the club here, and it's the decision that's not the most pleasant, but perhaps the most sensible. 

[Leeds Ram]

Just now, PistoldPete said:

I think the EFL statement came across as the desperate one.

The compensation claims are just of nuisance value more than anything. 

The admin team have a duty to act on behalf of the creditors. They clearly do not regard Boro and Wycombe as creditors. And they should know about these things. They are clear about the legal position so there should be no need for a fire sale which would be very damaging for our finances. 

The good thing is that the admin team have made it now in the open what I have been suspecting for some time.. they don't seem to be getting on with EFL any better than Morris did.. they have just been more polite and subtle about their differences.

 

But now they are calling out the EFL for the duck jobs that they are.   And rightly so. 

 

I've not read the EFL statement so I can't comment on that. I think the fact they were issuing what effectively was a call to arms calling out the EFL is itself a sign of trouble in the water and realistically I don't think we can beat the EFL. Maybe I've been overly influenced by reading about the Paris Commune's last acts recently before it all went south for them as they tried to square off against the convention and giving out ever more angry statements and creating last gasp plans before it all fell apart. 

The fact they're discussing alternative forms of revenue to keep us going that haven't been finalised strikes me that this is an issue they believe is not going away soon and with no quick fix and given their previous statements I'm not confident they can locate a source of alternative funding for us. Reports of telling players they're free to leave are circulating and not being able to extend contracts is yet another problem. I don't think liquidation is inevitable but i think it's much more of a possibility than it was recently. 

[Ramleicester]

So the unspecified footballing claims which we assume are from Middlesbrough and Wycombe are delaying the sale.

The EFL will not tell those two clubs to back off without some form of process (long winded) being completed.

So the likelihood is that no buyer is likely to WANT to be named as a preferred bidder or CAN be named as a preferred bidder as the risk for any buyer is perceived as too big, mainly because of the uncertainty on the size of the claims.

Hence the EFL asks for what the plans are to fund the club for the rest of the season.

Solution:

The Administrators should insist the Governing body ie. The EFL bring the footballing parties (Middlesbrough,Wycombe and DCFC) together VERY quickly to agree a possible maximum liability. Not to argue the merits of the case but to mutually agree a range of liability from £0 to a max figure. This would then allow bidders for the club to fully assess the risk and move forward or bail out.

Without something like that the situation will be stuck in the circle of doubt until the money runs out and the club folds.

The failure of the Administrators to look at this sort of strategy is odd given their responsibilities.

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, Ramleicester said:

The failure of the Administrators to look at this sort of strategy is odd given their responsibilities.

Consider that they didn't think the EFL would go 'against statute' and there is your answer!

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

Need to get a proper media campaign going- hopefully Niall Horan, Jack O'Connell, Radio Derby, Derbyshire MPS, everyone start with hashtags etc. Derby have been perceived as cheating but people need to know....something simple like  #STOPTHEEFL. Stop the EFL blocking Derby's takeover by allowing Derby to be held to ransom by unscrupulous chairmen and EFL board members.

 

#STOPTHEEFL

....OR eff off Gibbo