Jump to content
IGNORED

Derby County


havanatopia

Recommended Posts

I have a suggestion or two for the EFL to help the process along- supporters group letter to Quantuma and EFL. ⬇️

https://ramstrust.org.uk/wp/dcfc-supporters-groups-letter-to-quantuma-and-efl/

The Bury template is one solution- you could say, but with a lot more legalese.

Quote

"Wrap it up within all requirements by the release of the fixtures or membership/the Golden Share is suspended.

"Further to this, like with Bolton and Bury you get until the end of August as the Notice of Withdrawal can be activated- to help this process along, fixtures can be suspended if required in order to assist the club in focusing on finding a new buyer- suspended fixtures like with Bury can be made up but once it gets beyond August that has a real impact on the calendar".

That would help to bounce everyone along a bit- a deadline, followed by a next stage deadline- followed if not completed within all requirements- by removal from the League.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Seems Mike Ashley wants a very good deal indeed. No idea of the credence of the poster however.

 

The answer to that, from the EFL, HMRC et Al would surely be 'no'?

He's essentially saying 'let us off everything' as I read it! Court cases everywhere if that is allowed surely and no punishment whatsoever for DCFC who can spend, spend, spend.

Edited by Ska Junkie
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
  • Flames 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Invoking the great god of GDPR to block a condition contained within a Notice of withdrawal from the League. Quantuma clearly have an awful lot that they don't want the EFL to read. 

Would be amazing if the EFL played hard ball and kicked Derby out for this.

Can just see a meme of Trevor Birch holding a golden share over a shredder!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The flint in the lighter will spark imminently is the threat!

Forever imminent. 

Jokes aside this reads like pretty desperate stuff from Q. 

It's also another example of how the EFLs rules clash with standard laws and regs like GDPR. As with the admin exit requirements we again see Q arguing that Derby are essentially just a normal company, and so only really interested in your everyday laws. The EFL then overlay their own rules that apply to their members. Which ones win out ultimately comes down to how hard the EFL are willing to stand by their rules. 

I'm expecting a passive aggressive asterisk next to Derby's name in the fixture list on Thursday. 

  • Like 4
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the article, Quantuma are funding the administration by getting advances from MSD. MSD are securing these advances against the stadium. This implies to me that the stadium would have to be sold or receive guaranteed rent for MSD to get any of this back. The only party that would have any interest in Pride Park as a stadium would be Derby County and nobody is going to pay the "market value" for Pride Park to buy Derby County. Is it just me thinking if this was any normal business, Derby would've been shut down ages ago. My head hurts.

Head Die GIF by MarmotaStudio

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, red from the blue side said:

According to the article, Quantuma are funding the administration by getting advances from MSD. MSD are securing these advances against the stadium. This implies to me that the stadium would have to be sold or receive guaranteed rent for MSD to get any of this back. The only party that would have any interest in Pride Park as a stadium would be Derby County and nobody is going to pay the "market value" for Pride Park to buy Derby County. Is it just me thinking if this was any normal business, Derby would've been shut down ages ago. My head hurts.

Head Die GIF by MarmotaStudio

How are the securing money against the stadium then Derby doesn't own it, Mel Morris does,

 

  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

Pointless. If the EFL has final say over the owners, why does it matter when they see the details. It must be quicker and easier to get the EFL bit out of the way first, what's the point in getting 95% of the way there and then having the EFL say no?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, billywedlock said:

Whilst I am sure the EFL will have been irritated by this latest nonsense, though it will have legal substance, it seems to me they were only try to expedite the process. I also do not imagine that the EFL will make it ore difficult for the takeover completion, it is not in their interests. However, Derby are getting close to the point where the EFL will not want to commit to having Derby in L1 if there is a great risk that they will not be able to fulfil the season, or even have enough players to start it.  The funding to cover ongoing administration is coming from MSD, who are allowing Morris to borrow against the stadium, so in effect Morris is funding the admin process/ongoing wages. However, the loans are getting close to what the land value (maybe exceeded already) of Pride Park, so MSD are hardly going to be lending much more. There has to come a point when the EFL have to say enough, other clubs are clearly angry with Derby, or should we say the shambles of Quantuma, who went down the road with a blagger, that anyone with an ounce of sense would have found out was never going to complete the deal (and even if he had, they would have been back in Admin before seasons end). The stark reality is that the debts far exceed the clubs value, and the cost of exiting administration is also too strong for investors, even at the £22M Nixon quoted, which should have been acceptable to others, but as with all of this, the full story is not really out there is it. Ongoing funding has also to be provided, and then the stadium issue. The club is not an ongoing concern, it is effectively bankrupt. The person who needed to solve this all was Morris, but he has sought to minimise any further losses , pushing Derby further into a dark hole. Bidders are still there, same names from months before, so what has changed apart from the debts are now higher. Liquidation could also be the better solution right now, and they restart in non league as DCFC 2022. In 5 years they would be back at L1/Champ and had some fun along the way. 

The EFL will have to set a clear deadline now , to accept or not Derby into L1 next season. As it stands, they cannot , as there is no club. The season starts in 6 weeks. 

That post will surely elevate you well up the Derby Fans hit list, along with Mr P  and Davefevs,  for stating harsh, but home truths, along the lines of the Emperor's new clothes.

There is a worry that Ashley is increasingly looking like the only interested party, but that he will use that position to extract what is (for him) the best possible deal.  From what I've read Ashley seems to be using his position as the only buyer to force the EFL to waive any points deduction, to avoid, or at least substantially reduce what is owed to HMRC and to get Pride Park back for nothing , or next to nothing.

Surely, the price for DCFC is what it is because the club does not own Pride Park, has been relegated to league 1, will likely incur a points deduction for next season and has an outstanding tax liability to HMRC. If the EFL and/or HMRC give in to Ashley's demands then it makes an even bigger mockery of financial rules, and punishment for breaches thereof, than have DCFC/Mel Morris over the last 3/4 years, and which got them into this mess in the first place.

Many have said that it will perhaps take a big club to go to the wall before all clubs take the financial regulations seriously. While none of us would want a club to fail ( I remember our predicament in 1982) perhaps this is the moment that the EFL has to decide where it's priorities lie - with one big club, or with the other 71!

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, downendcity said:

If the EFL and/or HMRC give in to Ashley's demands then it makes an even bigger mockery of financial rules, and punishment for breaches thereof

True but you will find claims on their forum for example that the P&S rules are unwritten so the EFL is making them up as it goes along and that the EFL insolvency policy is not in the public domain. Ludicrous claims like these tend not to be challenged by other posters.

Of course it is all on the EFL website so I can only conclude that those posters can write but not read or simply don't know how to find a website.

But of course if they were ever to find and actually read the documents they would just insist that they shouldn't apply to them because they're special.

  • Like 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, fgrsimon said:

Wonder if Oldham might get a reprieve if Derby go? EFL won't want an uneven number of teams in any league, so reprieve Gillingham to L1 and Oldham to L2?

Nope league 1 will run with 23 teams with only 3 going down but 4 still coming up 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Changed his tune.

 

A good point for a timely reminder from the Portsmouth paper The News:

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/football/portsmouth-fc/andrew-andronikou-the-controversial-figure-who-tried-to-sell-a-sports-editor-to-blackpool-fc-portsmouth-fans-feel-derbys-pain-as-football-league-step-in-during-takeover-frustration-3729590

The man who stepped in to clear up the mess? Trevor Birch, who Derby fans seem to think is out to kill their club.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/06/2022 at 14:06, chinapig said:

True but you will find claims on their forum for example that the P&S rules are unwritten so the EFL is making them up as it goes along and that the EFL insolvency policy is not in the public domain. Ludicrous claims like these tend not to be challenged by other posters.

Of course it is all on the EFL website so I can only conclude that those posters can write but not read or simply don't know how to find a website.

But of course if they were ever to find and actually read the documents they would just insist that they shouldn't apply to them because they're special.

I agree with this and the other posts on this page- the only bit I would say is that the Insolvency Policy really could do with more transparency.

The only bits in the public domain tbh are the -12 for entering admin and the limited right of appeal there, the -15 for the 25% or 35%/3 and Football Creditors. Beyond that though it is quite opaque- when Kieran Maguire posted snippets of it in March or April, they were findable nowhere- I looked for them, I did keyword searches- did research for a job at one point or was a part of the role- definitely beyond some basic bits, it seems not to be in the public domain Insolvency Policy wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...