Jump to content
IGNORED

Derby Deserve Relegation; Are the Football League going to bungle this one too?


havanatopia
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Interesting to note that Derby aren't paying rent on Pride Park!? Nixon...

Hope the EFL are on this. A paper transaction at the very least needs to be there for FFP purposes!

That's not to say that it doesn't figure because the Gellaw Newco 202 and the Gellaw Newco 204 accounts for 2019 and 2020 showed nothing- not even a paper transaction.

Unique among clubs who have 'sold' and leased back their grounds!

As no monies were exchanged during the sale (other than the 3rd party loan charged by MSD against the freehold,) why would the holding company expect to receive rent? Other than to create an artificial 'income' (sic) the beneficial owner of the stadium never changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

As no monies were exchanged during the sale (other than the 3rd party loan charged by MSD against the freehold,) why would the holding company expect to receive rent? Other than to create an artificial 'income' (sic) the beneficial owner of the stadium never changed.

Gellaw Newco 202 and 204 sit outside the football group.

Had it been or remained within the same group, then the profit would have not been a factor for FFP.

Whether it's real or paper, there needs to be something for this season and beyond. Possibly all of the transactions were paper but where profits/'profits' count towards FFP, so must the rent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Interesting to note that Derby aren't paying rent on Pride Park!? Nixon...

Hope the EFL are on this. A paper transaction at the very least needs to be there for FFP purposes!

That's not to say that it doesn't figure because the Gellaw Newco 202 and the Gellaw Newco 204 accounts for 2019 and 2020 showed nothing- not even a paper transaction.

Unique among clubs who have 'sold' and leased back their grounds!

⬇️⬇️⬇️

25 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

As no monies were exchanged during the sale (other than the 3rd party loan charged by MSD against the freehold,) why would the holding company expect to receive rent? Other than to create an artificial 'income' (sic) the beneficial owner of the stadium never changed.

Almost as if the stadium sale was a bit dodgy isn’t it?

That just makes the decision to allow a “sale” of £81m look massively generous to Derby.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Gellaw Newco 202 and 204 sit outside the football group.

Had it been or remained within the same group, then the profit would have not been a factor for FFP.

Whether it's real or paper, there needs to be something for this season and beyond. Possibly all of the transactions were paper but where profits/'profits' count towards FFP, so must the rent.

Without accounts who knows?

Perchance if there is a lease it came either with an extended rent free period, else peppercorn rent. Of course, if the former, there should still show an amortized charge against both budget and liability  but nothing against cashflow.

I'm not sure how FFP deals with lease amortization?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

⬇️⬇️⬇️

Almost as if the stadium sale was a bit dodgy isn’t it?

That just makes the decision to allow a “sale” of £81m look massively generous to Derby.  

Not to forget there was an existing floating charge against the freehold from when it was constructed though I'm told that was minimal. Some time ago I posed the question as to whether the figure of £81m was required to account for that and the MSD charge but apparently not?

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Without accounts who knows?

Perchance if there is a lease it came either with an extended rent free period, else peppercorn rent. Of course, if the former, there should still show an amortized charge against both budget and liability  but nothing against cashflow.

I'm not sure how FFP deals with lease amortization?

This is a fair point. If you look at Birmingham, Reading, Sheffield Wednesday and even Aston Villa you will see a corresponding rent payment which is ultimately charged to Profit and Loss.

No accounts for Derby for 3 years but looking at the other clubs possibly except Birmingham due to IFRS and the parent being in Hong Kong, rent is on a straight line basis.

The company who 'purchased' Pride Park is Gellaw Newco 202. The 'company' who controls them is Gellaw Newco 204, obviously all under Mel Morris ultimately. Neither show rent.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Not to forget there was an existing floating charge against the freehold from when it was constructed though I'm told that was minimal. Some time ago I posed the question as to whether the figure of £81m was required to account for that and the MSD charge but apparently not?

Getting a bit complicated for me now but appreciate the knowledge on here 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Almost as if the stadium sale was a bit dodgy isn’t it?

That just makes the decision to allow a “sale” of £81m look massively generous to Derby.  

As if anything Morris did was dodgy!

Of course if the stadium was really worth £81 million, and it had stayed within the 'FFP group' there would not be a problem now.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Wouldn't be so sure.

Nixon is running a story that suggests a rich American tied to one of the bidders is putting up £7m, Rich Riley.

The elusive preferred bidder that has been imminent for weeks I wonder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

I dont think a white Knight is coming,

I dont see Derby escaping this, I'm fully expecting them to be liquaded a week tuesday

Not that I have a particular hatred of Derby, but I think it will take a “big club” going completely and utterly to the wall, and then being hoisted by their own pétards, * to make the game rethink what football means and how it is funded.

The status quo just cannot continue. 

* obvious mixing of metaphors accepted 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

10 hours ago, exAtyeoMax said:

I dont see how they can force the sale of pride Park,

That's like me forcing you to sell your house to pay my bills,

If Derby don't legally own pride Park and mel does then how can it be sold with out mels say so,

It's as if Mel knew the gamble sold himself the ground as an insurance policy incase his gamble didn't pay off,

Like Mel Morris didn't have the club's best interest in mind but his own and used the ground to cover his investment 

 

Edited by Monkeh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

 

 

I dont see how they can force the sale of pride Park,

That's like me forcing you to sell your house to pay my bills,

If Derby don't legally own pride Park and mel does then how can it be sold with out mels say so,

It's as if Mel knew the gamble sold himself the ground as an insurance policy incase his gamble didn't pay off,

Like Mel Morris didn't have the club's best interest in mind but his own and used the ground to cover his investment 

 

Don’t know. If Mel owns the whole lot then he might. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

 

 

I dont see how they can force the sale of pride Park,

That's like me forcing you to sell your house to pay my bills,

If Derby don't legally own pride Park and mel does then how can it be sold with out mels say so,

It's as if Mel knew the gamble sold himself the ground as an insurance policy incase his gamble didn't pay off,

Like Mel Morris didn't have the club's best interest in mind but his own and used the ground to cover his investment 

 

Because there's a charge against the ground and that, ultimately, is guaranteed by Morris. If the club goes bust he's still on the hook to MSD, would have to pay them in cash, but he would still own a pretty much worthless football stadium without a team. He doesn't have to sell, but he'd be crazy not to.

Nothing clever about the 'sale' which was done wholly to artificially create 'income' (sic) to improve the FFP figures. Remember, no monies changed hands. Using different companies he effectively bought his own stadium at an inflated price using loans taken from, er, himself (plus the MSD loan used for cashflow.)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Because there's a charge against the ground and that, ultimately, is guaranteed by Morris. If the club goes bust he's still on the hook to MSD, would have to pay them in cash, but he would still own a pretty much worthless football stadium without a team. He doesn't have to sell, but he'd be crazy not to.

Nothing clever about the 'sale' which was done wholly to artificially create 'income' (sic) to improve the FFP figures. Remember, no monies changed hands. Using different companies he effectively bought his own stadium at an inflated price using loans taken from, er, himself (plus the MSD loan used for cashflow.)

And that's the point, no one knows, sadly it just seems their local rag is clutching at straws and just trying to write anything positive about the situation to me,

I mean they must of posted at least 30 articles about the preferred bidder about to be named, in the last 2 or 3 months

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

It's just a puff piece,

The Middlesborough thing keeps being brought up as if it's come about last minute,

But it's been ongoing since 18/19 and Derby keep kicking the can down the road and now crying foul about it,

If it had been dealt with like if Derby accepted their punishment last season and took their 5 point deduction instead of appealing 4 or 5 times

None of this will be happening,

It's a situation of Derby's own making and I have little sympathy for them, only for the fans

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

And that's the point, no one knows, sadly it just seems their local rag is clutching at straws and just trying to write anything positive about the situation to me,

I mean they must of posted at least 30 articles about the preferred bidder about to be named, in the last 2 or 3 months

Well we know who the beneficial owner is of each entity and in the case of the loan charge we know it's original value, though reports say further loans have been made to keep the club trading, one assumes secured against the asset.

Naturally the local 'rag' will say anything to keep it's viewership onside (not sure Reach publish papers anymore.) The preferred bidder is pretty much 'chicken and egg' as they can't be announced until all bidders are happy that documents provided for their due diligence are in order and they've been able to submit their BAFOs for consideration. As the EFL highlight, by the end of the month the plan needs to be in place and that has to include the EFL having conducted their 'fitness' assessment on whoever the preferred bidder is. They aren't being given much time by the administrators.

Edited by BTRFTG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

It's just a puff piece,

The Middlesborough thing keeps being brought up as if it's come about last minute,

But it's been ongoing since 18/19 and Derby keep kicking the can down the road and now crying foul about it,

If it had been dealt with like if Derby accepted their punishment last season and took their 5 point deduction instead of appealing 4 or 5 times

None of this will be happening,

It's a situation of Derby's own making and I have little sympathy for them, only for the fans

 

So Samuels is another one who doesn't get that the EFL is not a party to the disputes between the clubs concerned. Nor do the Administrators and their antics get a mention.

Seems to be a bit much to expect some journalists to do actual research before pontificating.

Next up: HMRC should leave Derby alone because, you know, Brian Clough and stuff.

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

More interesting are reports in papers today of Jason Knight saying he'd like to stay at Derby despite attracting serious interest from The Premier.

Were I in his shoes, knowing if I don't go this window opportunities will still be there in the summer, what's to lose by sitting it out? Club goes bust I'm a free agent and you can have me for a percentage of what you would have spent on a transfer fee. Derby saved, they're unlikely to keep me next season in Div 1 hence will be desperate to get me off their hands.

Win, win for him, I'd say, but minefield for Derby if he doesn't go immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

More interesting are reports in papers today of Jason Knight saying he'd like to stay at Derby despite attracting serious interest from The Premier.

Were I in his shoes, knowing if I don't go this window opportunities will still be there in the summer, what's to lose by sitting it out? Club goes bust I'm a free agent and you can have me for a percentage of what you would have spent on a transfer fee. Derby saved, they're unlikely to keep me next season in Div 1 hence will be desperate to get me off their hands.

Win, win for him, I'd say, but minefield for Derby if he doesn't go immediately.

When does the transfer window close,

If its 31st Jan and Derby are gone on 2nd Feb,

Does that mean all players that stay can't sign for other clubs until the summer as they can't be registered?

Shows the situation the players find themselves in, and to be fair you have to give tons of respect to them and Rooney, they have shown themselves to be a fantastic group 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

When does the transfer window close,

If its 31st Jan and Derby are gone on 2nd Feb,

Does that mean all players that stay can't sign for other clubs until the summer as they can't be registered?

Shows the situation the players find themselves in, and to be fair you have to give tons of respect to them and Rooney, they have shown themselves to be a fantastic group 

No, free agents may sign for whoever they wish at any time.

That was the point about the 8 who'll be 'celebrated' (sic) this weekend. In their day when clubs folded the administrators retained their registrations to attempt to sell on, though that could take years. No income, can't play elsewhere. That's why they negotiated hard for their registrations plus the monies they took in lieu of contracts. No dream or benevolence on their part and who could blame them?

Part Bosman but rules have now changed. Club fails to fulfill your contract and registration reverts to you 

Edited by BTRFTG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Club goes bust I'm a free agent and you can have me for a percentage of what you would have spent on a transfer fee.

The player registration actually passes to the EFL on a liquidation.  They can then negotiate a fee with the purchasing club which is used to repay any unpaid Football Creditors in the first instance.  It won't have much impact on the individual players as they will need new contracts to get paid.

Edited by Hxj
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...