Derby County

[PHILINFRANCE]

6 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Morris is such a skuzz! He is holding a gun to everyone’s head to save himself from further loss, whipping up the supporters against claim/s, one of which had been outstanding for a long time, and Quantuma have followed the same path. 
 

While I know it suits the agenda of a lot of Derby supporters to blame the EFL MFC and WWFC for the fact the ex owner is beneath contempt, but surely most out side of the sane lad that posts here must know. 

Whilst admiration is obviously the wrong word, I used to have a sort of grudging understanding of what MM was trying to do, i.e. bet the house on Derby getting promoted using somewhat 'dubious' means, a la Bournemouth, QPR, even Leicester.

I lost what little respect I might have had for him, however, when he failed to settle what, for a multimillionaire, must surely have been a relatively small outstanding debt owed to the volonteer led St John Ambulance, leaving Derby's supporters to pick up the bill.

As you say, 'beneath contempt'.

[Paulton Red]

I can’t claim to understand much of the financial analysis that goes on on this thread, but I had a question

if anyone (for example MM) pays legal fees or damages that Derby might incur, would that not affect FFP in the same way giving the club £20m to pay or sign players  would?

[BTRFTG]

12 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Like many on here, I suspect, I don't consider Mel Morris to be the most trustworthy character.

Nevertheless, he claims to have received expert legal advice that 'confirms' the claims touted by Middlesbrough and Wycombe (against Derby County) have no chance of succeeding and, to 'prove' his good faith and support for Derby, he has offered magnanimously to invite the claims to be presented directly against him personally, thus absolving Derby and/or their prospective new owners of any potential liability and allowing the proposed takeover to proceed unhindered.

For various reasons, it would seem such actions are not possible (MM has, of course, never been advised that this might be the case ) so why does this honourable gentleman not simply place an appropriate sum in an escro type account (I am thinking of approximately £60M - £45M for Middlesbrough, £5M for Wycombe and the £10M balance to cover fees, interest etc) thus enabling the takeover to proceed and save his beloved Derby County from liquidation?

After all, where is the risk?     

Because his legal advisors would have highlighted there's no claim against him personally, it's against the club.

Now I suppose he could, in theory, offer for Derby to add a contingency impairment to their books, he could purchase that 'debt' from them for hard cash and look to recover the debt should the court case go Derby's way (buying Derby insurance cover might be another option.)

All that of course means whatever monies he fronts Derby are unlikely ever again to be seen by him, monies being consumed elsewhere in the process. Easier all round for him to now give the club a cash injection or to have paid the monies upfront in the first place.

[BTRFTG]

13 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

The MSD secured loan is apparently, a falsely secured shareholder loan- according to this guy anyway! Which if reclassified as equity lops £20m off the debt. 

I think where he's coming from is the charge against Pride Park (as distinct from the more recent charge against the lease on the training ground,) is secured against the whole schedule of companies of which Morris was the beneficial owner. So in theory the club might be excused the charge as it would then fall to one of Morris' other enterprises to satisfy. MSD could force Morris' hand either to cough up else sell the ground. Now we know Morris has already offered to help Derby in any way he can so why not use any of the companies. listed in the schedule to satisfy?

Come on Melvyn, what's stopping you?

[Derby_Ram]

16 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Will actually rephrase my bit on Mel Morris and the MPs- they don't appear to criticise him much. Picked out Bridgen but could pick Solloway, Pauline I forget her name...there are a few and yet there is radio silence as far as I can see.

With the exception of a couple of off-the-cuff interviews on local radio and news you're right about the MPs. It's not just the Tories either, Margaret Beckett has been the same. In an ideological world I'd like to think that's because they're all fully onboard with the fan led review and see Derby as the perfect vehicle to drive that message but with the exception of the Bury MP's eloquent speech I think I'd be living in cloud cuckoo land if I believed it to be true.

My opinion and it is only that, is the MPs don't criticise Morris for two reasons. Firstly they genuinely do want the club to survive and they wouldn't have the cut-through getting the emergency question in Parliament and it remaining on the news agenda if they'd have made it about Morris as opposed to the EFL and other clubs claims.

The second reason is they know it won't work. He doesn't have a personal issue with any of them. Re-read his statement last week and I challenge you to not picture Mad Mel sat at his desk frothing at the mouth as he brain dumped absolutely every point of contention he has with the EFL and Gibson who are both under his skin - whether or not it had any merit, or whether or not it was related to the current situation. It's been building up and up and his ego and personal grudge is what provoked him to respond. He doesn't have a personal issue with the MPs or others and calling him out will fall on death ears. Just look at Derby fans paying St John's Ambulance as evidence of that. Something so basic, so easy to fix, but he had vanished.

As a fan it puts you in a quandary. You want your club to survive, know it could be resolved by Morris doing the honourable thing, but recognise the best chance to survive is focus the attention elsewhere - as much because there is interaction with the other stakeholders and they don't want to be portrayed as being a reason another club dies. We're in a world of social media and briefings online. Rick Parry spent a Saturday evening a couple of weekends ago responding individually to Derby fans emails in addition to the EFL at the time appearing very rattled with their oddly timed statements and contents. Morris doesn't have that online presence. By default more and more gets directed at those who do respond - MPs, Parry, the EFL in general, Quantuma and Gibson. If Morris was visible he'd get a lot more heat and its why in the ground the stance is more anti Morris/Pearce than appears online. It'll leave a very bitter taste in the mouth if it's how we do come out of it the other side but I believe its our best chance. Not Morris. Sadly.

Along with most I'm highly dubious that Morris' offer to personally take on the claims is possible. This is where I do want Gibson to come out and say just that (although preferably now after tomorrow's game rather than today) and pile the pressure back on Morris. It shouldn't take a week for anyone to say it can't be done if it really can't. My preference would be for him to indemnify the club against any legal action as an alternative to what he's suggested but my thought process - again just that - is it may not fly elsewhere. If I'm sat at the HMRC and I see Morris offer an indemnity my first thought is "hang on, you want us to take a haircut on what we're owed when in a few months time you 'could' be paying Boro/Wycombe £40m+?". If Derby - via Morris - can pay that amount then you could also pay us the full amount now and we're not going to play ball. Frankly I couldn't blame them.

Apologies for the long message, but if you're on this thread.....!

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, Derby_Ram said:

With the exception of a couple of off-the-cuff interviews on local radio and news you're right about the MPs. It's not just the Tories either, Margaret Beckett has been the same. In an ideological world I'd like to think that's because they're all fully onboard with the fan led review and see Derby as the perfect vehicle to drive that message but with the exception of the Bury MP's eloquent speech I think I'd be living in cloud cuckoo land if I believed it to be true.

My opinion and it is only that, is the MPs don't criticise Morris for two reasons. Firstly they genuinely do want the club to survive and they wouldn't have the cut-through getting the emergency question in Parliament and it remaining on the news agenda if they'd have made it about Morris as opposed to the EFL and other clubs claims.

The second reason is they know it won't work. He doesn't have a personal issue with any of them. Re-read his statement last week and I challenge you to not picture Mad Mel sat at his desk frothing at the mouth as he brain dumped absolutely every point of contention he has with the EFL and Gibson who are both under his skin - whether or not it had any merit, or whether or not it was related to the current situation. It's been building up and up and his ego and personal grudge is what provoked him to respond. He doesn't have a personal issue with the MPs or others and calling him out will fall on death ears. Just look at Derby fans paying St John's Ambulance as evidence of that. Something so basic, so easy to fix, but he had vanished.

As a fan it puts you in a quandary. You want your club to survive, know it could be resolved by Morris doing the honourable thing, but recognise the best chance to survive is focus the attention elsewhere - as much because there is interaction with the other stakeholders and they don't want to be portrayed as being a reason another club dies. We're in a world of social media and briefings online. Rick Parry spent a Saturday evening a couple of weekends ago responding individually to Derby fans emails in addition to the EFL at the time appearing very rattled with their oddly timed statements and contents. Morris doesn't have that online presence. By default more and more gets directed at those who do respond - MPs, Parry, the EFL in general, Quantuma and Gibson. If Morris was visible he'd get a lot more heat and its why in the ground the stance is more anti Morris/Pearce than appears online. It'll leave a very bitter taste in the mouth if it's how we do come out of it the other side but I believe its our best chance. Not Morris. Sadly.

Along with most I'm highly dubious that Morris' offer to personally take on the claims is possible. This is where I do want Gibson to come out and say just that (although preferably now after tomorrow's game rather than today) and pile the pressure back on Morris. It shouldn't take a week for anyone to say it can't be done if it really can't. My preference would be for him to indemnify the club against any legal action as an alternative to what he's suggested but my thought process - again just that - is it may not fly elsewhere. If I'm sat at the HMRC and I see Morris offer an indemnity my first thought is "hang on, you want us to take a haircut on what we're owed when in a few months time you 'could' be paying Boro/Wycombe £40m+?". If Derby - via Morris - can pay that amount then you could also pay us the full amount now and we're not going to play ball. Frankly I couldn't blame them.

Apologies for the long message, but if you're on this thread.....!

As I wrote, the first thing Melvyn could do this afternoon to assist Derby should he so wish (which I very much doubt,) would be to satisfy the charge in respect of the MSD loan against Pride Park which he's able to do through his other entities listed in Schedule 1. That we understand is upward of £20m and though that nominally makes little difference to Derby's value on the market it does reduce any potential risk to purchasers as their funds, with which they appear willing to part, would be used to reduce preferential debt giving Derby an improved chance of survival.

But Melvyn's known that for months and personal damage limitation, which he's focussed on since pulling the plug, does not accord with offers he knows have nil legal basis. I might as well offer Gibson to sue me and upon receipt refuse to accept citing the established and proven fact it has nothing to do with me. Those things he is able to do he appears unwilling to discharge.

[Super]

Agreement made apparently.

[Derby_Ram]

Or just get Gibson and Morris to talk to one another. Now the pressure goes to Quantuma....

 

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, Derby_Ram said:

With the exception of a couple of off-the-cuff interviews on local radio and news you're right about the MPs. It's not just the Tories either, Margaret Beckett has been the same. In an ideological world I'd like to think that's because they're all fully onboard with the fan led review and see Derby as the perfect vehicle to drive that message but with the exception of the Bury MP's eloquent speech I think I'd be living in cloud cuckoo land if I believed it to be true.

My opinion and it is only that, is the MPs don't criticise Morris for two reasons. Firstly they genuinely do want the club to survive and they wouldn't have the cut-through getting the emergency question in Parliament and it remaining on the news agenda if they'd have made it about Morris as opposed to the EFL and other clubs claims.

The second reason is they know it won't work. He doesn't have a personal issue with any of them. Re-read his statement last week and I challenge you to not picture Mad Mel sat at his desk frothing at the mouth as he brain dumped absolutely every point of contention he has with the EFL and Gibson who are both under his skin - whether or not it had any merit, or whether or not it was related to the current situation. It's been building up and up and his ego and personal grudge is what provoked him to respond. He doesn't have a personal issue with the MPs or others and calling him out will fall on death ears. Just look at Derby fans paying St John's Ambulance as evidence of that. Something so basic, so easy to fix, but he had vanished.

As a fan it puts you in a quandary. You want your club to survive, know it could be resolved by Morris doing the honourable thing, but recognise the best chance to survive is focus the attention elsewhere - as much because there is interaction with the other stakeholders and they don't want to be portrayed as being a reason another club dies. We're in a world of social media and briefings online. Rick Parry spent a Saturday evening a couple of weekends ago responding individually to Derby fans emails in addition to the EFL at the time appearing very rattled with their oddly timed statements and contents. Morris doesn't have that online presence. By default more and more gets directed at those who do respond - MPs, Parry, the EFL in general, Quantuma and Gibson. If Morris was visible he'd get a lot more heat and its why in the ground the stance is more anti Morris/Pearce than appears online. It'll leave a very bitter taste in the mouth if it's how we do come out of it the other side but I believe its our best chance. Not Morris. Sadly.

Along with most I'm highly dubious that Morris' offer to personally take on the claims is possible. This is where I do want Gibson to come out and say just that (although preferably now after tomorrow's game rather than today) and pile the pressure back on Morris. It shouldn't take a week for anyone to say it can't be done if it really can't. My preference would be for him to indemnify the club against any legal action as an alternative to what he's suggested but my thought process - again just that - is it may not fly elsewhere. If I'm sat at the HMRC and I see Morris offer an indemnity my first thought is "hang on, you want us to take a haircut on what we're owed when in a few months time you 'could' be paying Boro/Wycombe £40m+?". If Derby - via Morris - can pay that amount then you could also pay us the full amount now and we're not going to play ball. Frankly I couldn't blame them.

Apologies for the long message, but if you're on this thread.....!

Excellent points and pleasingly free of special pleading.

Does Gibson really need to tell Morris that he can't take on the claims though when it's obvious to anybody who gives it a minute's thought? If Morris doesn't get that already it goes to confirm my hypothesis that wealth doesn't necessarily correlate with intelligence.

[chinapig]

4 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

Or just get Gibson and Morris to talk to one another. Now the pressure goes to Quantuma....

 

Thanks, intriguing and good news. Assuming Gibson hasn't dropped his claim does this mean Morris has agreed to pay a given sum to Gibson or Boro as a private individual I wonder?

As per your previous post I wonder what HMRC's view will be.

 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Thanks, intriguing and good news. Assuming Gibson hasn't dropped his claim does this mean Morris has agreed to pay a given sum to Gibson or Boro as a private individual I wonder?

As per your previous post I wonder what HMRC's view will be.

 

I would imagine Mel will pay Boro.  It’s Boro that need the money not Gibson.  I guess the two outcomes are:

- he’s agreed to pay Boro a mutually agreeable sum

- he’s agreed to underwrite the result of the claim 

[PHILINFRANCE]

4 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Because his legal advisors would have highlighted there's no claim against him personally, it's against the club.

Of Course, and hence the reason I added a  to my comment 'it would seem such actions are not possible (MM has, of course, never been advised that this might be the case )'

It would be like Company A threatening to sue Company B and Mr X stepping in asking to be sued instead, only for it to be discovered that Mr X is, in fact, insolvent/bankrupt.

It is and always was a complete non-starter. 

[Bristol Rob]

 

[chinapig]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I would imagine Mel will pay Boro.  It’s Boro that need the money not Gibson.  I guess the two outcomes are:

- he’s agreed to pay Boro a mutually agreeable sum

- he’s agreed to underwrite the result of the claim 

No doubt you are right. I would guess the first is more likely as the second would mean the claim is technically unresolved still and would take time and attract legal costs.

Why Morris couldn't have done this months ago is another matter.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, chinapig said:

No doubt you are right. I would guess the first is more likely as the second would mean the claim is technically unresolved still and would take time and attract legal costs.

Why Morris couldn't have done this months ago is another matter.

Because he’s a ****!

[chinapig]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Because he’s a ****!

Yes, but apart from that. Actually, no, you've got it.

[BTRFTG]

More questions than answers.

How does the accord, whatever form it takes, make it easier for the sale of Derby to proceed? A few specifics would be good given Melvyn's shown himself to be wholly untrustworthy.

Who are defined as interested parties within the agreement and thus may be privy to the detail of the accord? All creditors perchance, should the outcome impact them?

By what mechanism has Melvyn entered into a binding legal agreement on behalf of Derby County FC so far as I'm aware he isn't in a position so to do? Gibson & Melvyn may have reached a personal agreement but not sure what action they might take against each other?

Perhaps leave it here

 

Edited February 11, 2022 by BTRFTG

[Bristol Rob]

Probably agreed that both sides of the argument would be in for a million in legal fees, both sides presented why they believe they will win, both sides said, tell ya what, let's save 2 mil on the legals and settle for 3.5mil.

No one loses face, we both save cash, Boro are better off and Derby don't have this hanging over them.

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

More questions than answers.

How does the accord, whatever form it takes, make it easier for the sale of Derby to proceed? A few specifics would be good given Melvyn's shown himself to be wholly untrustworthy.

Who are defined as interested parties within the agreement and thus may be privy to the detail of the accord? All creditors perchance, should the outcome impact them?

By what mechanism has Melvyn entered into a binding legal agreement on behalf of Derby County FC so far as I'm aware he isn't in a position so to do? Gibson & Melvyn may have reached a personal agreement but not sure what action they might take against each other?

Perhaps leave it here

 

Quantuma are tasked with getting the legal stuff sorted re this.

[PHILINFRANCE]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Quantuma are tasked with getting the legal stuff sorted re this.

I bet they are mortified, as this will undoubtedly increase their fee.

[BTRFTG]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Quantuma are tasked with getting the legal stuff sorted re this.

Yes, but of the little we do know the statement confirms the accord was a result of a private conversation between the two, in which case what's Melvyn doing negotiating a settlement for an entity with which he has no authority, or is it implied Quantuma authorised him to act on their behalf?

Of course we don't know what the accord says, so all is speculation.

[PHILINFRANCE]

10 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

More questions than answers.

How does the accord, whatever form it takes, make it easier for the sale of Derby to proceed? A few specifics would be good given Melvyn's shown himself to be wholly untrustworthy.

Who are defined as interested parties within the agreement and thus may be privy to the detail of the accord? All creditors perchance, should the outcome impact them?

By what mechanism has Melvyn entered into a binding legal agreement on behalf of Derby County FC so far as I'm aware he isn't in a position so to do? Gibson & Melvyn may have reached a personal agreement but not sure what action they might take against each other?

Perhaps leave it here

 

 

My reading of it is that MM has reached an agreement with SG, or rather, in reality, with Middlesbrough, who will receive payment of X and simply withdraw their claim.

It remains to be seen whether a similar agreement will be agreed with Wycombe, whose claim, to my mind, has more merit.

[BTRFTG]

8 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Probably agreed that both sides of the argument would be in for a million in legal fees, both sides presented why they believe they will win, both sides said, tell ya what, let's save 2 mil on the legals and settle for 3.5mil.

No one loses face, we both save cash, Boro are better off and Derby don't have this hanging over them.

Doesn't explain why Morris was even in the negotiation as he doesn't represent Derby County FC, or is the suggestion he's now accepting liability for debts through his beneficial stakes in the linked enterprise?

[chinapig]

Just now, PHILINFRANCE said:

My reading of it is that MM has reached an agreement with SG, or rather, in reality, with Middlesbrough, who will receive payment of X and simply withdraw their claim.

It remains to be seen whether a similar agreement will be agreed with Wycombe, whose claim, to my mind, has more merit.

Haven't the Administrators insisted that Wycombe have not actually made a claim? And who could possibly doubt them?

[Davefevs]

Just now, BTRFTG said:

Doesn't explain why Morris was even in the negotiation as he doesn't represent Derby County FC, or is the suggestion he's now accepting liability for debts through his beneficial stakes in the linked enterprise?

On a slight tangent…is Mel setting a dangerous precedent for himself?

[BTRFTG]

3 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

My reading of it is that MM has reached an agreement with SG, or rather, in reality, with Middlesbrough, who will receive payment of X and simply withdraw their claim.

It remains to be seen whether a similar agreement will be agreed with Wycombe, whose claim, to my mind, has more merit.

If true, that somebody who has no authority within an entity has agreed a personal arrangement for another party to drop prospective action against that entity, then in reality there can't have been much hope of said action ever having been successful.

We'd love to see the wording of that arrangement....

[BTRFTG]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

On a slight tangent…is Mel setting a dangerous precedent for himself?

Well, without the detail we don't know but I'm struggling to see how Melvyn has personally removed a potential liability against a club over which he has no authority (unless he's accepted in principle that the various entities were a linked enterprise.) If true, things could get very interesting.

[Yellow&Blue&Red]

If you threaten to sue me for... whatever. And a friend offers to pay you to go away and sign documents promising not to never sue me for that, then you may choose to sign those documents. The lack of a legal relationship between me and my friend is irrelevant.

[lenred]

4 minutes ago, Yellow&Blue&Red said:

If you threaten to sue me for... whatever. And a friend offers to pay you to go away and sign documents promising not to never sue me for that, then you may choose to sign those documents. The lack of a legal relationship between me and my friend is irrelevant.

But surely it sets further precedents for other interested Parties? 

[REDOXO]

So eyes turn to Couhig. His claim is for about 6m reputedly. 
 

That should not be insurmountable! At that point how saleable are Derby County. We will see!