Lionel Pickering

[G STAR RAM]

13 minutes ago, Crewton said:

AFAICR when the Co-Op stepped in, we had no overdue tax debt and no other clubs were suing us, which is a very clear distinction between Lionel and Mel. And, ultimately, Mel put the club into Administration and ran off. Maybe Lionel would have had to if the Co-op hadn't pre-empted such an action, but he didn't, and was left in a far worse financial position than Mel.

I'm not really sure how anyone can make a case for Lionel being a worse owner than Mel.

Lionel also didn't have a season with no income or a governing body making up rules as they went along in the hope of destroying the club.

Pickering was a better owner than Morris, he was a proper fan who, unfortunately, let his heart rule his head.

From a financial perspective though he was on a par with Morris for the mess he left us in and, ultimately, having to gift the club to a bunch of crooks because of his financial mismanagement.

As I say, if it weren't for the success we had on the pitch, his time may be viewed very differently.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

Pickering was diagnosed with a form of dementia prior to leaving the club and had been making some odd decisions prior to diagnosis turning down about 8 million in transfers which made no sense at the time. Morris didn't have this excuse.   Pickering also had the sense to reduce spending and cash in on players after 94, rather than throwing money at it he didn't have prior to promotion when he was still mentally capable. . 

 

[DavesaRam]

3 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Lionel also didn't have a season with no income or a governing body making up rules as they went along in the hope of destroying the club.

Pickering was a better owner than Morris, he was a proper fan who, unfortunately, let his heart rule his head.

From a financial perspective though he was on a par with Morris for the mess he left us in and, ultimately, having to gift the club to a bunch of crooks because of his financial mismanagement.

As I say, if it weren't for the success we had on the pitch, his time may be viewed very differently.

But the reason the EFL were inventing rules to shoot us with was because of Mel. His proposal of a breakaway league after the EFLuent had ballsed up the TV money simply put ys in their cross-hairs, and all they had to do was wait for their chance. Thank You very much, Kevin McGoo. 😡

The difference between Mel and Lionel is that Lionel didn’t go into denial and start cooking the books in order to deny any blame. In contrast, neither was he shafted and stabbed in the back by Frank Lampard - it was the Co-op who pulled the plug and then threw the club into the voracious hands of the 3 Amigos.

[G STAR RAM]

38 minutes ago, DavesaRam said:

But the reason the EFL were inventing rules to shoot us with was because of Mel. His proposal of a breakaway league after the EFLuent had ballsed up the TV money simply put ys in their cross-hairs, and all they had to do was wait for their chance. Thank You very much, Kevin McGoo. 😡

The difference between Mel and Lionel is that Lionel didn’t go into denial and start cooking the books in order to deny any blame. In contrast, neither was he shafted and stabbed in the back by Frank Lampard - it was the Co-op who pulled the plug and then threw the club into the voracious hands of the 3 Amigos.

The Co-Op pulled the plug but how much longer could we have continued as we were?

Over £30m in debt and losing between £10m and £15m a year, at the same time as selling off our decent players.

 

[MadAmster]

16 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

The press and Maguire should do more research then, as the figures were clearly presented in the Administrators Statement of Affairs and the club did not owe MM, and he did not write off, £140m.

That was money he put into the club, via his various investment vehicles, via equity purchases. That is not a debt to the club. The best analogy I can give is that if I my dad lends me £100 to but some Rolls Royce shares, then Rolls Royce does not owe my dad £100 and he cannot go to them for his money.

Get the general gist of your second point and you may be in the right region, although the £450m will include the original purchase price of the club which was in the region of £50m.

Also, in none of the accounts filed did our turnover top £30m, although income would have with transfer income taken into account.

Whilst on the point of transfers, it's worth mentioning that Pickering ended up selling of our crown jewels for peanuts to plug the gaps, which is akin to our academy being raided during administration. 

Ergo, the £200M+ loss to MM is correct.

September 25th, 2021. The Daily Mail (poor example, I know) reported MM would be "Well in excess of £100m is owed to Derby owner Mel Morris in soft loans, and he will not be seeking a penny".

May 29th, 2022. Russell Pollard on derbynews dot org dot uk "Based on figures in the Administrator’s report, Mel Morris will need to write off around £124m owed by the companies in administration. The stadium which was bought by one of Morris’ companies for £81m, 4 years ago, may only fetch £20m resulting in a further £61m write off for Morris. £36m is required to pay debts owed to HMRC. Paying the minimum of a few million pounds to unsecured creditors is small change, but necessary, to avoid a further 15 point deduction next season."

Easy to see why people think the opposite to you. Not saying who's right. 

BBC September 22nd, 2021. "Having lost, by his own estimation, £200m of his own money on Derby, he felt he had no option other than to put the club into administration."

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, MadAmster said:

Ergo, the £200M+ loss to MM is correct.

September 25th, 2021. The Daily Mail (poor example, I know) reported MM would be "Well in excess of £100m is owed to Derby owner Mel Morris in soft loans, and he will not be seeking a penny".

May 29th, 2022. Russell Pollard on derbynews dot org dot uk "Based on figures in the Administrator’s report, Mel Morris will need to write off around £124m owed by the companies in administration. The stadium which was bought by one of Morris’ companies for £81m, 4 years ago, may only fetch £20m resulting in a further £61m write off for Morris. £36m is required to pay debts owed to HMRC. Paying the minimum of a few million pounds to unsecured creditors is small change, but necessary, to avoid a further 15 point deduction next season."

Easy to see why people think the opposite to you. Not saying who's right. 

BBC September 22nd, 2021. "Having lost, by his own estimation, £200m of his own money on Derby, he felt he had no option other than to put the club into administration."

I fully understand why people may think the opposite to me but it's extremely easy to go on Companies House and check the information. 

Morris may have had to write off £124m but that was nothing to do with the club, as explained in my previous post.

£200m sounds about right to me. £50m on the purchase of the club and around £150m of losses over his time in charge.

[StarterForTen]

7 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

around £150m of losses over his time in charge.

And your argument is that Lionel’ tenure lost similar figures, adjusted for inflation?

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, StarterForTen said:

And your argument is that Lionel’ tenure lost similar figures, adjusted for inflation?

No, my point was that they left us in a comparable financial mess.

[londonbridgeram]

Met Lionel and Jim and a couple of players (Van Der Laan for sure) at a gathering in London. We had what we called a forum at the time. I remember mostly Jim and Lionel discussing about who was buying the next drinks. And I don't know who won out (but it would have been Lionel paying). 

On another occasion I met Brendan Batson who regaled us with a story of Jim Smith and big daft Ron at a Brum-centric gathering. And Ron basically accusing Jim of being a piss-head. Pot and kettle.

[Chester40]

10 hours ago, londonbridgeram said:

Met Lionel and Jim and a couple of players (Van Der Laan for sure) at a gathering in London. We had what we called a forum at the time. I remember mostly Jim and Lionel discussing about who was buying the next drinks. And I don't know who won out (but it would have been Lionel paying). 

On another occasion I met Brendan Batson who regaled us with a story of Jim Smith and big daft Ron at a Brum-centric gathering. And Ron basically accusing Jim of being a piss-head. Pot and kettle.

I think we can safely assume Jim Smith enjoyed a good drinkie-poos... as did Cloughie.  And Rooney got himself into some scrapes, not forgetting Paul Jewell.

Hardly surprising the Keogh-debacle occurred when drinking is (was) so ingrained in the game.

I think the fitness-side of things is preventing its continuation.  In the past players like Adams, Robson,  Keane would be the biggest drinkers and then still 'perform' in training which gave them  leadership qualities. I'd hope training is quicker,  more intense and more about having a decent touch rather than still being able to drag yourself around the training ground, and players who enjoy the high life get found out a lot quicker.

[IslandExile]

8 hours ago, Chester40 said:

I think we can safely assume Jim Smith enjoyed a good drinkie-poos... as did Cloughie.  And Rooney got himself into some scrapes, not forgetting Paul Jewell.

Hardly surprising the Keogh-debacle occurred when drinking is (was) so ingrained in the game.

I think the fitness-side of things is preventing its continuation.  In the past players like Adams, Robson,  Keane would be the biggest drinkers and then still 'perform' in training which gave them  leadership qualities. I'd hope training is quicker,  more intense and more about having a decent touch rather than still being able to drag yourself around the training ground, and players who enjoy the high life get found out a lot quicker.

Off topic (sorry, BTW I was a fan of Lionel) but on the subject of a drinking culture in football, my favourite story was of when Jimmy Greaves when he first joined West Ham.

He asked the players which pub they went to after training. They all looked at eachother then replied that they didn't go to the pub, they all went home. Jimmy said "never mind, I know a few good ones around here". He said that was the start of what became the "Happy Hammers".

[cannable]

On 30/05/2024 at 12:18, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

We only lost money on Pembridge.  Johnson never really fitted in the formation and we signed Gabbiadini without watching him play.  Season before we had Ormondroyd and Davison who looked a very good pairing.  I believe based on interviews that Davison was promised a move as he got about 8 in 10, then we signed Gabbiadini instead.  A shame as I think it seriously sullied his opinion of the club and you can see that in interviews.  

Yeaaaaah… his Rams TV meets video was a bit of a waste of time to be honest.

Think he regularly has to stop himself as well by saying “I don’t want to have a pop because he’s an old man now”.

It’s a shame, a bit like how Nigel Clough hates us. The people who wronged them are no longer at the club. They’re taking their bitterness out on the fans if anything.