BTRFTG

Covid was first reported end Jan 2020, it's impacts not felt for a couple of months afterwards. Odd it therefore prevented publication of accounts for the period June 2018/2019. You see the problem with claiming all these 'ifs and buts' sums is they're meaningless without reference to non-impaired accounts and the problem at Derby is it appears most linked entities are allergic to posting those.

At the risk of sounding a conspiracist your contact wasn't 'au fait' with Richard Keogh's kneecaps perchance?

Any idea what breakdown of the creditors falling within one year are, in particular the 'trade' creditors. I think those were listed at £7m but strikes me as high if that is rates/maintenance. Might the supposed stadium costs also have included disguised, advance elements of 'lease income' that are paid back to, say, MSD?

Just looked it up. So for all we know Melvyn Morris, whilst appearing on paper to own the stadium, might actually own little more than a £3k liability beyond the over-inflated value of that asset on Gellaw's accounts, all residual value being absorbed by the MSD and Gabay Charges?

Ah, so any idea the scale of the charge and any of those blank boxes showing what it was for and what it might take to remove it?

As to ownership, the only thing I could see was the Freehold Stadium is owned by Gellaw Newco 202 (102 having been wound up.) As I highlighted in that company's incorporation there is but one share and Director, Melvyn Morris, but it doesn't automatically follow he's the beneficial owner, he simply has power to run that company. Now you'll have noted there are two charges against the assets held by that company, one from MSD for the operational cashflow we know about, there's also the mysterious 'Floating Charge' in respect of RAMS INVESTMENT LTD. The charge (for intangibles as well as fixed assets,) is listed in the financial documents but as these haven't been filed it's value is, well, you tell me? Now the directors of that company are names with which I'm unfamiliar and Melvyn Morris isn't one of them. My understanding is the money for the initial and subsequent development of Pride Park (NB there were other divested commercial elements at play,) was partly Morris but also mates of his, which may explain the floating charge via RAMS INVESTMENT. The MSD charge is later I think and was for cashflow to stop the shebang folding. Could be the Floating Charge is minimal and exists wholly to make things difficult should it be necessary to divvy up assets, the problem as you know is there are so many entities few of whom have lately published accounts, it'll take a forensic accountant to go through all company records (if there are any,) to find out what's been going on?

In this twisted web it may be worth being pedantic in saying a company of which, by association, Morris is sole director, though it may not necessarily follow he is the beneficial owner. I've seen elsewhere suggestion that funding may have come from him and other parties, excluding MSD.

According the accounts of the company that owns it it's worth £81.1m....

But is there any evidence rent has ever been paid? It's not in the investment holding accounts and Gellaw 203 (I hope you're sitting down,) have yet to file accounts which are long overdue. As you say, £1.1m per season in rent would give nowhere near a valuation of £81m for the stadium.

Once sold there's nothing left to gift and Morris already has no say over the club. There's also doubt that Morris funded the stadium acquisition wholly with his own money. What if he's borrowed some if it himself? Were I a potential buyer willing to pick up the MSD, HMRC & football debt that would have to be subject to Gellaw selling me the stadium at the price I'd demand. With Hobson's I'd expect to pay no more that £15-20m for it.

That makes no sense. The company (capitalised at £1) who owns the stadium (as supposedly an investment vehicle,) values the asset at just over £81m but has creditors within one year at just over £3k more than the value of the asset. Interestingly, one might have assumed to see rental income in their accounts but none appears, hence they'll doubtless argue it appears as a 'capital appreciation vehicle' only. Therein lies one huge problem. The value of the asset is intrinsically linked to the amount of income it might generate, plus wider land/asset appreciation. The £81m figure was doubtless reached by considering a legal commitment by Derby County FC to lease the stadium back at £Xm per season for Y seasons. Now if they forego that, what other entity might desire to lease a Sports Stadium in Derby and at what price? If the answer is nobody or peanuts, the asset value downgrades overnight and one wonders whether creditor loans (where the money came to buy it in the first place) are secured against the freehold or lease income? Giving the stadium to the Administrator makes little sense as it strengthens funds available to creditors and lessens the prospect of getting monies back to those who purchased the stadium. The only reason for so doing would be high poker stakes, if one thought long-term Derby would come good, start making a Kings ransom and one might claw that back through club profits not the stadium vehicle (assuming one still held a stake in the club.) Pigs will fly first.

And therein lies the problem with fans. We emotionally support a club and indulge using terms such as 'us', 'ours', 'we', save it isn't ours and never will be. It's not our debt, it's not our money, not our club, it's SL's. In his case it makes sod all difference whether or not the club owns the ground, he owns the whole shebang, on his own, outright. And that's why muppets who criticise for him not investing further in stupid purchases are nothing but deluded. They think they have a 'right' to dictate the club's future, they think they should have a say, yet don't have the wherewithal to make a difference. Just be thankful we've a benefactor with deep pockets who, for now, is happy to indulge us in our hobby. Shame those ingrates who anonymously berate him on social media don't realise they're the ones making it more likely he'll one day decide he's had enough. Don't bite the hand that feeds.

But recall Morris had been seeking a purchaser for years and such deals take years to reach fruition. Bit like saying I'll buy your house but not until you've replaced the roof. Maybe not here, but I wonder if MSD had been positioning Morris to structure the club toward something they'd be prepared to purchase, hedging their bets either way should Derby reach the Premier or not. Stranger things have happened in business.

One thing it would be interesting to know is whether the sell and splitting of the ground, which clearly helped Derby's FFP hole, might also have been a requirement by MSD for their loan and potential takeover? Seems to me if a struggling club has freehold (not ground) sought by others then it could be worth a punt by any asset-stripper to keep them afloat via a loan secured against a discretely secured holding. Few years down the line and with the link severely weakened between club and prime asset, that asset suddenly becomes a potential weakness. Sod the club and force their hand.

Worth highlighting that a majority of creditors must agree to any CVA and that could be problematic. MSD can only get their money back from the ground, so one option might be for them to pick up the tax & footballing debt, force a CVA with non-preferential creditors & buy both club & ground (cheaper than it was initially offered but it's a much diminished product.) On the other hand maybe they've lost interest, or might acquire only as a flip to somebody else, else force the whole shebang into liquidation and get monies back from development options on the ground. Derby fans must be hoping Dell don't want a new production/ storage facility in the UK.

I'd hold fire on the printing for now, there's a decent chance they'll be an historical footnote within the next few months.

I did rate him - 'poor to rubbish' on my scale.

Under The Cosh? Don't you mean 'Whip' or 'Starters Orders', for Hunt was 90% equine (by which I don't mean throughbred.) He played as though his eyes were on the side of his head, he couldn't see right in front of him, constantly having to rock his napper to and fro. When he jumped he resembled the radar scanner at Lulsgate. Feet like hooves to boot.

But you compared to the previous years figures and, er, we don't know what they were as they aren't yet at Companies House. Hint: neither are the accounts for the year before that! Do catch up.

Jeff Bezos shipping thousands of Sunflower Lanyards to Horfield as I type.....

Because child abusers go out of their way to display traits that might indicate they abuse those under their care, they'd never collude to hide their intentions toward children - not for one minute implying The Fake Sheikh is anything other than wholly upstanding in that respect.

I loved he 'couldn't disclose or comment', then provided sufficient personal details to easily be traceable. Irrespective of whether or not things are 'made up' the first rule of a safeguarding policy is when a complaint is raised its recorded, investigated using an agreed procedure and steps are taken to ensure all parties are protected in the immediate future with wider actions taken, if necessary. This would include responding to the complainant that post investigation no cause for concern was substantiated against allegations made. None of which appears to be reported by either side in this case.

BBC hadn't covered football, let alone sport, in years. Unless it has a race, gender, or disability angle they couldn't give a flying. MOTD is a pre-packaged highlights joke, presented by woke muppets, with comment by fence-sitting dullards, pandering to the populist masses. Frankly amazed football focus even exists these days.

If you want to hold concerts, or trade shows, or whatever, build that which is fit for purpose, not a sports stadium. How many events may an uncovered sports stadium hold each year? Not many, they're not designed for set up, logistics et al. Two perhaps 3 large events = peanuts. Contrast bespoke arena that may flip events daily. That's why at Spurs they designed an innovative 2 sports stadium, it cost a fortune so to do but at least it allows them extra income but that's from an additional sport, not entertainment. If you inherit a sports stadium and wish to better utilise it, start by knocking it down. There is no repurposing. Look at the nugatory space in concourses, projections et al. At most grounds the acoustics are so crap one can't hear the stadium announcements, let alone host a concert. Latest generation NFL stadiums are designed, under cover, to host other events, outdoor MLB stadia host very little other than baseball. AG without football or rugby would be a white elephant.

Spot on. And for those who bang on about AG & it's value, it's a Football Stadium. It facilitates income from a football club and, er, not much else. That's why such assets have RLVs much, much lower than folks imagine.