Jump to content
IGNORED

Derby County


havanatopia

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Is this correct? EFL regs are an agreement to arbitrate and seem to basically forbid court action as part of their terms of membership.

What would happen if all 23 clubs collectively refused to play them?

@Davefevs  I thought Chansiri was bad but he's got nothing and I mean nothing on these *******.

I was simply making a comparison between the EFL's naivety and weakness and how the courts treat parties who are taking the piss and wasting the courts' time. Not suggesting clubs could take court action.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I was simply making a comparison between the EFL's naivety and weakness and how the courts treat parties who are taking the piss and wasting the courts' time. Not suggesting clubs could take court action.

Oh okay, thanks- got mixed up- I assumed you meant the EFL would have been deemed the vexatious litigants by a court. I'm not sure any provision exists in EFL regs sadly but could be wrong.

They have to prove it was the sole cause, the burden of proof lies with the club so...

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a laugh, Derby fans thinking I'm ill-informed on their issue- not read a fans forum with such an unwarranted sense of entitlement and persecution complex about such issues...

Some poor sap hoped that they would be signing Adam Armstrong this summer- I mean really!? Maybe it was saps.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's a laugh, Derby fans thinking I'm ill-informed on their issue- not read a fans forum with such an unwarranted sense of entitlement and persecution complex about such issues...

Some poor saps thought they would be signing Adam Armstrong this summer- I mean really!?

Maybe they got him mixed up with Seth Armstrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, supercidered said:

Maybe they got him mixed up with Seth Armstrong.

More chance of signing Neil Armstrong...

What stuns me though is a) They thought the EFL would allow them to turn on the spending taps this summer again given their likely FFP position b) The lack of accounts c) The hit to income for all combined with the continuing need to comply with point a. I mean wow.

Some of this thread makes for funny reading now.

https://dcfcfans.uk/topic/37431-summer-2021-transfer-window-suggestion-thread/#comments

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's a laugh, Derby fans thinking I'm ill-informed on their issue- not read a fans forum with such an unwarranted sense of entitlement and persecution complex about such issues...

Some poor sap hoped that they would be signing Adam Armstrong this summer- I mean really!? Maybe it was saps.

In fairness if we were in the same boat I suspect most of our fans wouldn't bother to inform themselves on the numbers or the regulations. After all we still have some who insist Steve uses P&S as an excuse not to spend money.

What you tend to get is a majority arguing on emotional grounds, which is not unique to Derby fans. I may think @AnotherDerbyFanfalls into motivated reasoning but at least they examine the numbers and regs to make their case, which I can respect 

Edited by chinapig
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they'll go bust- they strike me as too lucky and yes he was, as high as one can get!

A good few years of suffering in the lower Leagues would be more than satisfactory however. A bonus of a good firesale in Jan would be no bad thing either. A 2 year business plan or embargo would be welcome.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rot runs deep though, you only have to read this Supporters Trust meeting with the EFL and some of the questions.

https://ramstrust.org.uk/wp/efl-response-to-ramstrust/

image.png.26f5385df31b5790572597009bead628.png

Okay on one level, fair- a break-even in cashflow, perhaps even a positive cash-flow naturally generated could be one good way forward. However querying the regulations they tried to swerve is also a bit rich.

image.png.b8abdc61074aaaa1b64677dce37ea540.png

EFL's response is spot on.

image.png.106589eb8f1bdc33be34c308c99652f8.png

As it is with this.

image.png.16712f33ebddb313cafa0513423306b5.png

As it is with this.

They're either grossly entitled or hard of thinking some of them.

Most of these questions are stupid and whether subconciously or otherwise, contain more than a little undercurrent of special pleading.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

To keep things simple, only Bielik, Bird, Knight, Sibley and Jozwiak are currently contacted beyond the end of the season

That will make complying with League One FFP easier!

 

5 hours ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

you must surely concede that there is some merit to the appeal

I'm not sure if there is any merit or not.  I suspect that it will depend upon the debt to HMRC and the background to the winding up action and the withdrawal of that action, plus the funding pattern from Morris over the years and how that changed.  'Solely' is going to be very difficult to prove given the known previous financial circumstances.

 

5 hours ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

I'm led to believe that a club doesn't have to submit accounts after going into administration?

That is correct as far as Companies House goes, they will not pursue the accounts, but that doesn't mean that they can't be submitted. However the EFL regulations require it.  So it is possible that in order to comply with the EFL regulations and come off the Embargo, accounts will have to be submitted to Companies House.

 

5 hours ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

the delay in submitting the accounts was because of the ongoing charge

I don't believe that.  I suspect it was because submitting accounts would require Morris to either agree that the company was a going concern, and agree (due to the Companies Acts) to fund it for 12 months after the accounts were submitted, or accept that the company wasn't a going concern and face suspension from the EFL. 

I can't see any reason why the post 2018 accounts were not submitted to Companies House and the EFL with an understanding that the FFP position would be finalised after the decision on the earlier years.

... oh wait .. maybe it was because the £25 million odd amortisation charge in the 2019 accounts would have remained hidden if those accounts were kept secret ...

Edited by Hxj
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick question @Hxj thought you might have some ideas.

Has it yet reached a point where the EFL, perhaps lobbied by a majority of rival clubs can look at Derby and their continued League membership?

Just wondering where the limits are, what the minimum criteria before looking into getting rid, suspending membership or not allocating fixtures? I struggle to see that the EFL or many if any rival clubs will have any patience left given that the administration team appear to be carrying on where the old regime left off.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Has it yet reached a point where the EFL, perhaps lobbied by a majority of rival clubs can look at Derby and their continued League membership?

It is possible - it needs the passing of a Special resolution at the AGM or an EGM.  No idea what the number needed is, but it is likely to be at least 75% of all members.

It won't happen unless Derby go into Liquidation in which case it will.

As I've said previously the 'Press Releases' are written for the audience of the person paying for them, so generally I ignore them.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hxj said:

It is possible - it needs the passing of a Special resolution at the AGM or an EGM.  No idea what the number needed is, but it is likely to be at least 75% of all members.

It won't happen unless Derby go into Liquidation in which case it will.

As I've said previously the 'Press Releases' are written for the audience of the person paying for them, so generally I ignore them.

Just liquidation then?

Not persistent breaches and attempted breaches, surely there are limits as to what every other party can accept.

One thing that also occurred, in the event that Pride Park sold back for much less, say £20-25m I saw mooted. FFP issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

One thing that also occurred, in the event that Pride Park sold back for much less, say £20-25m I saw mooted. FFP issue?

The new FFP Regulation:

1.1.2(b) with effect from, and including the Accounting Reference Period covering Season 2021/22, profit/loss on disposal of any tangible fixed asset.

solves one loop hole but creates another.

I would like a 1.1.2(c) which would read:

1.1.2(c) with effect from, and including the Accounting Reference Period covering Season 2021/22 no adjustment is made under Regulation 1.1.2(a)(i) or (b) where a profit on the the disposal of a fixed asset was included within the FFP calculations for a season before 2021/22, until the amount not so adjusted equals the profit so included.

Edited by Hxj
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So. If I am reading the latest reports correctly. 
 

Derby County’s administrators are going to argue that COVID-19 is a Force Majeure and as such going into administration was out of the control of the club. While simultaneously not supplying the three previous years of accounts that would prove or disprove their case!?

@Hxj @Mr Popodopolous is that a fair summary? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Derby County’s administrators are going to argue that COVID-19 is a Force Majeure and as such going into administration was out of the control of the club.

Yes.

5 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

While simultaneously not supplying the three previous years of accounts that would prove or disprove their case!?

No.

For an appeal Independent Accountants are instructed by the EFL, paid for by DCFC, to review all the financial circumstances of the club.  It has been reported that the EFL have asked for DCFC to supply six years of financial data to enable the report to be prepared.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

So. If I am reading the latest reports correctly. 
 

Derby County’s administrators are going to argue that COVID-19 is a Force Majeure and as such going into administration was out of the control of the club. While simultaneously not supplying the three previous years of accounts that would prove or disprove their case!?

@Hxj @Mr Popodopolous is that a fair summary? 

It's astonishing chutzpah isn't it.

They according to Nixon needed/need to submit 2015/16 to 2020/21 for thus purpose. However Nixon suggested that those accounts were only applicable for this case, don't need to submit to CH while in administration but surely P&S figures to the EFL.

We already know the substance of 2015/16 to 2017/18, save for the amortisation bit. Amortisation is a non-cash expense.

My understanding is that the accounts go to an independent firm of accountants who produce a report for the hearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Yes.

No.

For an appeal Independent Accountants are instructed by the EFL, paid for by DCFC, to review all the financial circumstances of the club.  It has been reported that the EFL have asked for DCFC to supply six years of financial data to enable the report to be prepared.

Six years of financial data? So not the annual reports for those years themselves? 
 

I know you two guys follow this stuff closely. Are there any other Championship clubs that have not submitted reports to the EFL over the same period?

@Hxj @Mr Popodopolous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Six years of financial data? So not the annual reports for those years themselves? 

The actual transactional data is considerably more valuable than the accounts.  This is because the accounts can be constructed from the data, but the data cannot be obtained from the accounts.

No other EFL clubs (all three divisions) currently have any embargoes for missing accounts or FFP data.

Edited by Hxj
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Hxj said:

The new FFP Regulation:

1.1.2(b) with effect from, and including the Accounting Reference Period covering Season 2021/22, profit/loss on disposal of any tangible fixed asset.

solves one loop hole but creates another.

I would like a 1.1.2(c) which would read:

1.1.2(c) with effect from, and including the Accounting Reference Period covering Season 2021/22 no adjustment is made under Regulation 1.1.2(a)(i) or (b) where a profit on the the disposal of a fixed asset was included within the FFP calculations for a season before 2021/22, until the amount not so adjusted equals the profit so included.

Thanks for the clarification. It's another loophole then,  would the EFL just have to accept it? I can't see other clubs letting them quietly. Can't see the EFL being at all happy about it either. The club or fans are hopeful for a takeover by January, these things can take time, especially to unpick complex issues...

1.1.2 (c) sounds interesting, what would that do in plain English? Amount not so adjusted- what would it mean for this if that was in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

I’m just waiting to see whether they have anyone credible interested.  I suspect not at this point.  In some respects a series of defeats might make things easier.  Results are making the -12 look like it can be overcome.

That is my fear too @Davefevs they just may survive this, which would be appalling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

That is my fear too @Davefevs they just may survive this, which would be appalling.

I don’t think they will survive once the -9 gets added too, but it gives them hope…and the Administrators are using that to try anything at the mo’.  I pray they lose every game this season.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

That is my fear too @Davefevs they just may survive this, which would be appalling.

It would also likely be the death of P&S so unless the government agrees Tracey Crouch's recommendation* for an independent regulator it will be a free for all.

*they won't as the Premier League will object and money talks. They just have to agree to pay for Boris' next holiday. ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ScottishRed said:

That is my fear too @Davefevs they just may survive this, which would be appalling.

 

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t think they will survive once the -9 gets added too, but it gives them hope…and the Administrators are using that to try anything at the mo’.  I pray they lose every game this season.

 

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

It would also likely be the death of P&S so unless the government agrees Tracey Crouch's recommendation* for an independent regulator it will be a free for all.

*they won't as the Premier League will object and money talks. They just have to agree to pay for Boris' next holiday. ?

 

Are we all a bit cross purposes?

No way that they survive - 21. The hoped for - 9 with 3 more suspended  P&S deduction should also come with a business plan.

In addition, there will be embargo type regulations still in play until such time as these are satisfied.

Finally @chinapig how does it end P&S? The EFL have significantly more leeway now. ie Fixed Asset loophole shut, plus no need to rush to get it done by June 30th unlike Harvey seemed happy to do- there is no upper limit as the EFL have said.

Though it would be funny if Derby got severely punished over amortisation then the amortisation laws were reformed. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more message, well it's two fold.

To some of the charmers on DCFCFans

By no means all, but a few objectionable ones- your knuckles must really drag given your reaction to critical if valid points. Derby away is next Spring is it?

To David

  1. Ah yes- the King- well so he thinks. Ads stopping for the site as club into admin- or potentially. A few words of comfort- "Get a proper job" as a chant has gone in the past.
  2. Secondly. Say what you will some of it is blah blah, but anyway whatever it is, one good thing that I am highly grateful for- at least I don't live in Grimsby. That is a place that has really seen better days although I expect the fish and chips are excellent...
  3. PS- when are you going to release the minutes- one of Mel's favoured sons (not literally), the Mel has now gone- yet still you sit on these. Letting down your loyal fans eh, bless.
Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hxj said:

The actual transactional data is considerably more valuable than the accounts.  This is because the accounts can be constructed from the data, but the data cannot be obtained from the accounts.

No other EFL clubs (all three divisions) currently have any embargoes for missing accounts or FFP data.

Ok so Derby County’s administrators are mounting an appeal based upon no accounts for previous years.
 

In your words transactional data that has not to this point been seen and the idea that this ‘data’ will show that they were never in financial difficulty despite never having produced accounts for the several years in advance of Covid.

Is that a fair summary?

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...