Derby County

[Mr Popodopolous]

Good thread by Andy Holt though and take Mel Morris's words with as much salt as you like but he occasionally raised some good points.

£16m per year average Championship loss is insanity. I know that's accounting and not FFP/Covid but as a starting point and perhaps pre Covid?

 

Edited May 6, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

One more thing after I did a bit of searching. EFL- or to give them their correct title the Football League- must not be allowed to backslide on this. Not one iota.

No leniency either in respect of the current issues- no accounts released in the correct manner=no removal from the EFL Embargo service.

Quote

• Can you confirm the penalties for Administration include an embargo for two years on signing players? How is this supposed to help find a new owner? This is totally counterproductive.

Clearly, seeking to ensure the long-term future of the Club is the primary objective for all parties, not least for the supporters, and as such, a number of difficult financial decisions must be made in order to assist the Club in reducing its debt and operating sustainably. As part of any insolvency event, the appointment of Administrators initiates a number of measures to seek to reduce debt and to mitigate ongoing losses in order to assist the Club find new investment. During this process the Club is under embargo to prevent any additional staff costs being incurred. However, the EFL will work with the Club in relation to such ongoing measures, and in the event of any future investment and exit from Administration, will agree a financial plan in accordance with its rules.

 However, the fact remains that even with the requirement to meet the minimum dividend to unsecured creditors any Club taking insolvency action will be released from significant amounts of debt whilst all other clubs continue to honour their ongoing commitments. An ongoing embargo restriction as part of a monitored business plan seeks to balance the interests of all members of the League and the integrity of its competitions.

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

Am a believer in the primacy of the rules and organisation- of a rules based organisation- taking precedence over the needs of any one club.

Quite a few heavily entitled fans as well, at least basing it on social media and the RamsTrust- "Can't you give the stadium back Mel"- £81m or at least the MSD security.  

"Ashley will spend big if he Ashley buys us"- nope moral hazard as above. The list of targets- would need a reasonably flexible business plan to say the least? Discuss.

That post by Ashfield Ram is perhaps reflective of one who has not grasped the League 1 post admin Business Plan reality.

League One AND a Business Plan to reflect and compensate for the the advantages gained via insolvency- anyone?

Tbh the post below perhaps is more realistic?

https://dcfcfans.uk/topic/39566-lg-1-appropriate-transfer-suggestions/page/6/#comment-2334246

Edited May 6, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Never to the dark side]

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-kirchner-rooney-morris-7048181

[REDOXO]

18 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Am I missing something? The players got paid the ongoing suppliers got paid the staff footballing or non footballing got paid. I thought that was why the players had to be sold for current cash flow purposes and to comply with the rules that effectively say that? 

 

18 hours ago, Derby_Ram said:

I think you are. It's all come to a head now because the cash runs out now. If the cash ran out last Jan it would have all come to a head then. If the cash didn't run out for another couple of months I don't think we'd be where we are tonight with a preferred bidder, an EFL statement, and a potentially imminent takeover.

(sorry - in reply to redoxo)

The cash was running out then that’s why the players were sold to ensure you continued to have cash and stay within the rules, was my understanding.  (and in one case to stop the cash depletion in wages but ignore the continued debt to the former club)

I still don’t follow, are you telling me that the players weren’t sold for cash and to stop cash depletion, there was some other nefarious reason? 

 

[REDOXO]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Just thinking this through, to get it right- if all goes as it might.

1. Derby have an HMRC debt of £36m- that gets cut by 65%.
2. The MSD secured debt- MORE public money. Councils based on a national average unsure about Derby Council, get 23% of their income from central Government,
3. That Council are owed money by the club too...

That'd be bad enough and is indeed bad but there is more of course...

1. While it is not financially directly to his benefit we believe, it gets him- Mel Morris off the hook- for the MSD debt. Possible talk of cross-guarantees, Personal Guarantees etc.
2. The same Mel Morris who is a Derby City Council Business Ambassador...
3. ...Plus who donated to the Tories in 2017 albeit once and at a local MP level.

 

Possible?? 1-3, let alone the morality of the public money aspect. Leader of Derby Council is a Tory of course.

 

With respect to the EFL I was thinking about this and have a starting point for a possible Business Plan for the next 2-3 years- and it needs to be reasonably punitive.

I think both the moral hazard and deterrence factors are important moving forward as well as the actual money.

PPS- nice to see Wycombe win last night. Two more wins for them and justice will be done.

 Wycombe

Derby

I mentioned this a few times earlier in the thread when The talk began about local councils kicking in loads of money. The conflict of interests of effectively paying off an employee/political appointee are staggering! 

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

I mentioned this a few times earlier in the thread when The talk began about local councils kicking in loads of money. The conflict of interests of effectively paying off an employee/political appointee are staggering! 

I remember. The lack of coverage is quite curious, there has long been a political element to this Insolvency.

Granted it could still work commercially but the potential conflict of interests is major.

Central Government too although I've not really looked at the Derby City Council accounts but some sort of temporary tapering off of some of the Central funds should be considered for such sharp practice, or rediversion from Derby to HMRC IMO.

Maybe £xm per year until such time as the gap between what is being mooted- 65% of £36m and the remainder has been paid off. Cut funding to the tune of £23.4m until the deficit made good- not per year in total but I dunno in 6 instalments? Cut funding minus the amount of interest from the loan if it is paid for on a Government loan returning to the Government...say £23.4m/6, £3.9m in funding per year cut but say £500k interest on a loan- that's £3.4m per year funding cut until HMRC have been repaid. Moral hazard in action! The numbers would stack up.

Not that I am particularly comfortable with my idea in all honesty but their actions seem tin eared, tone deaf and smack of special pleading in this climate. In all reality I don't really know the answer and am not necessarily in seriousness advocating rediversion of funding but their actions seem unacceptable on the face of it.

As I say it can work- Plymouth Council is a case in point but the sums were so much lower and I haven't looked into the finer detail but there doesn't seem to be the major conflict of interest on the face of it...that is not to say that it wasn't there but that seems like it was a transaction with less baggage.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/oct/18/plymouth-argyle-council-home-park

Edited May 6, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

On the rental point. 

Paragraph 72 and esp. 72 c)

Derby's valuation won and their valuer won therefore this is a Fair Market Rent- from the very valuer who gave Derby the basis for the transaction.

79 a) and 79 b) Give a rationale for both the £4.16m and the £1m per year figure.

However, 82 c)...

They reneged it would appear on the agreement. I would be shocked if the EFL formally ratified this reneging- it appears to have been unilateral.

I'd say the EFL have ample evidence to insist on that market rent- whether it's paper or real. To revisit for FFP purposes.

For the club specifically but the group/consolidator?

Certainly contrary to what Derby fans might say I don't see any definitive once and for all sign off.

Do they? This is another big elephant in the room because Aston Villa via NSWE Stadium Limited, Birmingham initially at least via Birmingham City Stadium Limited, remains to be seen, Reading initially via Renhe Stadium Management Limited and Sheffield Wednesday via Sheffield 3 Limited all show the rent received (paper or real I don't care)- one company does not. Gellaw Newco 202 Limited and indeed Gellaw Newco 204 Limited.

Derby would as per usual like to have their cake and eat it- I see no official EFL sign off or approval of the rent for P&S purposes. EFL should not rule out further charges if the accounts when finally received do not reflect whatever was agreed rent wise- further points, further punishment it shouldn't be ignored. What would be funny is if the rent for Pride Park was markedly lower than the Fair Value on there and pushed the overspending up- further charges and deductions please, either for new excess losses or for not complying with good faith if the Agreed Decision overrode it all.

If they don't release accounts, remain under a hard embargo- via the Embargo Reporting Service and have it their way...the EFL have to give no ground.

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/image/202021/general-news-images/efl-v-derby-county--decision.pdf

Edited May 6, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, Never to the dark side said:

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-kirchner-rooney-morris-7048181

So Leicester and Stoke are options for ground sharing and DCC are indeed negotiating the potential purchase of the stadium. That is ongoing though so Quantuma will either need to extend the exclusivity period or allow others to bid.

The question is whether Kirchner will continue to fund the club during any extended period and if so for how long?

[Monkeh]

On 05/05/2022 at 21:03, Derby_Ram said:

Just over £1m was the agreed outcome post the panel decision in on basis of club only using it x days per year. Remains to be seen if any deal is based on us having full time tenancy.

This is where you won't be surprised to learn that I do beg to differ .

Honestly, what did selling Shinnie, Williams, Plange, a couple of youth team prospects, and not renewing Jags contract do? Dug the EFL out of a massive hole that's what

No creditors have seen an extra penny because of it, and wouldnt have done had we sold others. All it did is drag the process out and got us to the end of the season when the money runs out and prevented the EFL worst case scenario of us going pop mid season.

This is the extra hidden punishment over and above the -21 that possibly was the thing that did relegate us.

If we'd sold someone extra for £1m in Jan do you believe creditors would get any more money? I don't, I just think what's happening now would happen 6 weeks down the line instead. I don't know how feasible it is but it's one thing I'd look to change about admin rules going forward - player sales = money for creditors and not just extending this period of lining admins pockets.

How is selling players to keep your club running diggingnthe efl out of a hole?

The efl didn't cheat Derby did,

The efl weren't responsible for Derby's reckless spending and illegal account practices

The efl weren't responsible for not paying the hmrc there cheating the British tax payer out of money that could of been spent on the NHS Derby were

Stop blaming others for your clubs mistakes you *******

Edited May 7, 2022 by Monkeh

[chinapig]

12 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

How is selling players to keep your club running diggingnthe efl out of a hole?

The efl didn't cheat Derby did,

The efl weren't responsible for Derby's reckless spending and illegal account practices

The efl weren't responsible for not paying the hmrc there cheating the British tax payer out of money that could of been spent on the NHS Derby were

Stop blaming others for your clubs mistakes you *******

You may be shooting at the wrong target. @Derby_Ramis rather more sensible and informed than the kind of people who tend to post on the Derby forum. That's where you will find arrogance, special pleading and conspiracy theories, especially that it is all a plot against them by the EFL. Pathetically, they have blocked access to their forum from here.

In a sense it is right to say the EFL were dug out of a hole in that Derby are favoured by the majority of football writers (because they used to be good decades ago and, you know, Brian Clough and stuff) as only a small minority have bothered to find out the facts and read the EFL regulations. Too much like hard work when they could be writing about the same old Premier League clubs.

So if Derby had run out of money and been expelled the media narrative might well have been to blame the EFL. That would have been reinforced by local MPs as there is political capital in it for them.

Whether that is @Derby_Ram's reasoning I don't know and I often disagree with them but you can at least have a debate with them.

But maybe they actually mean it's all the EFL's fault, in which case your post stands and I withdraw all my comments above.

Anyway, the money runs out this weekend so there are interesting days ahead!

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://theathletic.com/3297953/2022/05/06/understanding-derbys-stadium-impasse-council-ownership-msd-loans-and-playing-in-a-different-city/

One interesting snippet is that they would get a loan to purchase Pride Park, the council that is. Yet more central funding although this time the taxpayer shouldn't lose out.

One possible source mentioned though is the Public Works Loan Board.

Any idea how this fits with relatively recent legislation or similar?

https://www.ashfords.co.uk/news-and-media/general/hm-treasury-stops-public-loans-to-council-s-for-commercial-property

Expect you might have a view or insight @Hxj Could this not constitute borrowing public money with commercial property in mind.

[Davefevs]

Wise sages…what voting rights does Mel have in who buys the club, etc?

A guy in this tweet thread, suggests his £125m shares means he can veto any CK deal???

 

[Hxj]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

what voting rights does Mel have in who buys the club, etc?

None.

There is no debt owed to Morris directly by the football club.  Where the debt is owed to a connected company, that company is also in Administration.  Where a company is in Administration it is the Administrators that act in place of the directors, therefore they decide how that debt is voted.

[Hxj]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Could this not constitute borrowing public money with commercial property in mind.

Yes.  This and the 'State Aid' position is a problem.  Either makes life incredibly difficult for the council going forwards.

[Davefevs]

5 hours ago, Hxj said:

None.

There is no debt owed to Morris directly by the football club.  Where the debt is owed to a connected company, that company is also in Administration.  Where a company is in Administration it is the Administrators that act in place of the directors, therefore they decide how that debt is voted.

Thanks, so this bloke on twitter is wrong…and it’s not the first time he’s stated it is fact.

[Hxj]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

so this bloke on twitter is wrong

Yep.

Plus there is another problem.  As at 21 March 2022 Morris hadn't put a claim in, so he unless he does he couldn't vote anyway!

Edited May 7, 2022 by Hxj

[Mr Popodopolous]

Dunno about the veracity but seen it suggested that Derby's player wage cap ie for a player post administration could be capped at £6,000 per week.

I would support that! In conjunction with suitable limitations on transfer fees, loan fees, signing on fees an agents fees.

2 years, perhaps 3 I would hope. 2 is the usual but if you want 3 years to pay 35% then a 3 year monitored business plan seems like the right way to proceed.

[Derby_Ram]

13 hours ago, Monkeh said:

How is selling players to keep your club running diggingnthe efl out of a hole?

Stop blaming others for your clubs mistakes you *******

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt assuming the ******* was as a bad reaction to Rovers magnificent seven until I realised you posted this beforehand . Hope the blood pressure is ok this. Thoughts and prayers and all that.

 The only person responsible for where we are is MM.

As for digging the EFL out of a hole - had we gone pop halfway through the season it would have caused potential issues with the league table given we'd taken a variety of points of teams in the promotion and play off mix. Nothing more. Nothing less.

12 hours ago, chinapig said:

You may be shooting at the wrong target. @Derby_Ramis rather more sensible and informed than the kind of people who tend to post on the Derby forum.

Whether that is @Derby_Ram's reasoning I don't know and I often disagree with them but you can at least have a debate with them.

But maybe they actually mean it's all the EFL's fault, in which case your post stands and I withdraw all my comments above.

Thank you, firstly. It's not what I meant, as above, its only MMs fault but no doubt the EFL would have been bricking it if we'd had our record expunged and could have affected the play-off places. Especially if it kept Boro out. Maybe Gibson can sue the pitch invader kids' dad or the Reading keeper instead this year.

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Dunno about the veracity but seen it suggested that Derby's player wage cap ie for a player post administration could be capped at £6,000 per week.

This would be a fantastic result and above my wildest expectations! Our allowed spend on contracts in the summer was £4,500 per week max and Davies, Jagielka, Morrison, Baldock and Allsop all signed for that or less. 

[Derby_Ram]

10 hours ago, Hxj said:

None.

There is no debt owed to Morris directly by the football club.  Where the debt is owed to a connected company, that company is also in Administration.  Where a company is in Administration it is the Administrators that act in place of the directors, therefore they decide how that debt is voted.

Potential virtue signalling by Kirchner but he did like the tweet in question about MM being able to vote down any deal. 

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

As for digging the EFL out of a hole - had we gone pop halfway through the season it would have caused potential issues with the league table given we'd taken a variety of points of teams in the promotion and play off mix. Nothing more. Nothing less.

They’d have expunged the records, as is the rules…and teams would just get on with it as they have when other teams have suffered that fate.  There was enough of the season remaining, more than Lg1 covid ended season.

[Merrick's Marvels]

42 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt assuming the ******* was as a bad reaction to Rovers magnificent seven until I realised you posted this beforehand . Hope the blood pressure is ok this. Thoughts and prayers and all that.

We're all fine here but thanks for the concern. Touching. 

A tinpot club managed by a scumbag, over reliant on Premier league loanees to clamber out of Division 4 on the last day of the season, on goal difference, are of no concern to us. In fact, I actually hope they thrash you home and away next season.

And last but not least  you're not as clever as you think - try looking at the team Scunthorpe put out today. OK, I'll make it easier for you - if Forest are 1 game away from promotion and the opposition put out their U12s, what would your reaction be?

That's a rhetorical question, btw cos I don't give a shite for your answer. Be sure to enjoy life in Division 3. Just don't rush back. 

Edited May 7, 2022 by Merrick's Marvels

[Mr Popodopolous]

Putting aside the whole financial bit to an extent, this thread is an interesting read.

https://dcfcfans.uk/topic/39652-rewind-8-years/

Their mismanagement and decline is really hard to fathom. They lived reasonably within their means, had a talented young and mid range age side- spearheaded by a certain Chris Martin.

Mel Morris took a side and club in a good place and somehow completely fecked it up- gambled and on the pitch didn't get over the line and completely wrecked it off the pitch which kinda followed.

See also Chansiri at Sheffield Wednesday although they fell not quite as far and he didn't put them into administration. Inherited a solid if unspectacular Championship midtable club, spent- 2 playoffs and then yet by summer 2018 were in FFP trouble and by 2021 were in the 3rd tier having taken over in summer 2015.

Derby's plummet under Mel Morris took a bit longer, 2015 to 2022 but was starker.

[Hxj]

2 hours ago, Derby_Ram said:

Potential virtue signalling by Kirchner

Do you think that he might be looking for someone else to blame when he pulls out?  After all you do have a bit of a reputation with Morris, and the fake Sheikh and the tax fraudster!

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Derby_Ram said:

This would be a fantastic result and above my wildest expectations! Our allowed spend on contracts in the summer was £4,500 per week max and Davies, Jagielka, Morrison, Baldock and Allsop all signed for that or less. 

I think it might be in that ballpark although all told, I read it on DCFCFans, nobody really knows apart from Kirchner and the EFL I guess. Poster may have heard something, or maybe something on the radio- who knows?

There is that although retention of varied players signed on Championship wages in Championship times who are now out of contract would certainly prove to be challenging.

Edited May 8, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Derby_Ram]

10 hours ago, Davefevs said:

They’d have expunged the records, as is the rules…and teams would just get on with it as they have when other teams have suffered that fate.  There was enough of the season remaining, more than Lg1 covid ended season.

Agreed, that's what would happen. You'd still get the questions over the integrity of the final table. With League One & covid - different circumstances - but plenty of rumblings mainly from Peterborough.

9 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Their mismanagement and decline is really hard to fathom. They lived reasonably within their means, had a talented young and mid range age side- spearheaded by a certain Chris Martin.

Mel Morris took a side and club in a good place and somehow completely fecked it up- gambled and on the pitch didn't get over the line and completely wrecked it off the pitch which kinda followed.

Simple really. Next season after QPR play off final flying along until Feb. Rumours of McClaren to Newcastle, he didn't quash them and the wheel spectacularly fell off. He got sacked at the end of the season - first indication of Mad Mel. First game of the following season Will Hughes + Craig Bryson got long term injuries on first day of season, we panicked into paying over £10m combined for Bradley Johnson + Jacob Butterfield and since then gamble after gamble.

8 hours ago, Hxj said:

Do you think that he might be looking for someone else to blame when he pulls out?  After all you do have a bit of a reputation with Morris, and the fake Sheikh and the tax fraudster!

Touché!

From well placed sources the two are meeting this morning. Oh to be a fly-on-the-wall....

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

There is that although retention of varied players signed on Championship wages in Championship times who are now out of contract would certainly prove to be challenging.

Not too concerned in Y1 as based on whats happened we have very few players OOC earning more than that.

Lawrence - not going to be able to keep him in L1 so kind of a moot point. 

Byrne - very disappointed if he goes but wouldn't begrudge him staying in the Championship

Roos - backup keeper who we'd probably choose to release

Forsyth - age/ability would warrant a wage reduction to required levels if there was interest from our side. Not a guarantee there would be.

Edited May 8, 2022 by Derby_Ram

[Davefevs]

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Interesting post on the Derby forum. No idea of the veracity but there is a snippet in there that I only half considered.

Mentions FFP in relation to the stadium- one thing is for sure, the EFL need to give no favours or rule bending.

The integrity of the League, is more important than offering unfair help to the 1.

Technically there is a work around, Derby can pay their 5% in rent to the council and the EFL can use as the basis back in 2018 and what we saw in the 2020 Hearing for FFP purposes, even if the actual cash figure is different. ie the club, the Club DCFC and Stadia DCFC figure aggregated- days usage would be interesting. £1.1m for 100 days usage IIRC.

Alternatively, deduct the balance of rent as set by Derby's Independent valuer set against the council lease for a deduction as to what they can spend for the next 2-3 years then review it after the Business Plan and monitoring has expired.

Other than that the EFL should take a hard line if Kirchner wants something different.

On a different note, Mike Ashley might still be in for Derby or coming back in.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/05/08/mike-ashley-make-fresh-derby-county-offer-takeover-talks-hit/

Edited May 8, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

52 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

On a different note, Mike Ashley might still be in for Derby or coming back in.

There was always a school of though that Kirchner might end up being a “patsy” for Ashley and really screw Morris.

[Sir Geoff]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

Still imminent then ?

[Mr Popodopolous]

This Nottingham Forest fan makes a powerful point/argument.

It's a bit scathing but I do see the point he is making- a certain chunk of Derby fans, perhaps not exactly a small minority, would appear to like to have their cake and eat it. This is but one way.

I also wonder about this bit below.

If Derby liquidate, the loan gets written off does it? It seems an early thought of some is "how can we wriggle out of this obligation".

The insouciance of a good slug of them makes me more ambivalent to their plight than a range of clubs.

Here's another good one.

I suppose this one  thinks the EFL Insolvency Policy and justified restrictions to offset debt relief shouldn't or don't apply.

They should be waiting some time to spend any serious cash if the EFL Business Plan is up to scratch.

Okay I don't wish liquidation on them but their approach and mindset is hard to fathom! It irks.

Edited May 8, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

37 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This Nottingham Forest fan makes a powerful point/argument.

It's a bit scathing but I do see the point he is making- a certain chunk of Derby fans, perhaps not exactly a small minority, would appear to like to have their cake and eat it. This is but one way.

I also wonder about this bit below.

If Derby liquidate, the loan gets written off does it? It seems an early thought of some is "how can we wriggle out of this obligation".

Morris owns the company that owns the stadium, which owes £20m+ to MSD. That company is not in administration so liquidating DCFC won't help Morris in that respect surely?

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Morris owns the company that owns the stadium, which owes £20m+ to MSD. That company is not in administration so liquidating DCFC won't help Morris in that respect surely?

There was some kinda cross-guarantee I believe- the charges showed both the Football Group and the Stadium Group included- it's a right old mess it seems.

I see your point though, someone has to pay it- could always liquidate Derby and their assets, player sales and so on to pay off the creditors in order of priority. MSD would come top I expect- how much beyond the £20m or so to MSD would be left who knows.

Edited May 8, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

Morris owns the company that owns the stadium, which owes £20m+ to MSD. That company is not in administration so liquidating DCFC won't help Morris in that respect surely?

It won't. 

But is more along the lines of Morris owns the company, which owns the company which owns the Stadium.  And Morris owns the company, which owns the company, which owns the company, which owns the company which operates as football club, leases the stadium and owes MSD £25 million or so.  So the company which owns the stadium used that as security for the loan to the football company.  So when the man who indirectly owns the company which owns the stadium and indirectly owns the company which runs the football club stopped paying the bills it all got very complicated very quickly.  Simple

Edited May 8, 2022 by Hxj

[chinapig]

3 minutes ago, Hxj said:

It won't. 

But is more along the lines of Morris owns the company, which owns the company which owns the Stadium.  And Morris owns the company, which owns the company, which owns the company, which owns the company which operates as football club, leases the stadium and owes MSD £25 million or so.  So the company which owns the stadium used that as security for the loan to the football company.  So when the man who indirectly owns the company which owns the stadium and indirectly owns the company which runs the football club stopped paying the bills it all got very complicated very quickly.  Simple

Of course, how silly of me a 3 year old could understand it. Anybody know any 3 year olds I can ask?

[Lanterne Rouge]

17 minutes ago, Hxj said:

It won't. 

But is more along the lines of Morris owns the company, which owns the company which owns the Stadium.  And Morris owns the company, which owns the company, which owns the company, which owns the company which operates as football club, leases the stadium and owes MSD £25 million or so.  So the company which owns the stadium used that as security for the loan to the football company.  So when the man who indirectly owns the company which owns the stadium and indirectly owns the company which runs the football club stopped paying the bills it all got very complicated very quickly.  Simple

If only The Two Ronnies were still with us..........................

Edited May 8, 2022 by Lanterne Rouge

[Mr Popodopolous]

A quick question or thought.

If Mike Ashley and not Kirchner brought Derby, would Derby still be bound by a 2, or if it's a 3 year repayment of 35%, the appropriate Business Plan?

I would hope it is owner neutral and a given, an automatic consequence of going into Insolvency.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Another thought.

MSD takeover, buy inherit whatever Derby. Dell can afford it easily and they cover the debts be it right away or over 3.

Being an investment firm however they would want money back with interest.

1) New loans to Derby at 10% interest. That's one way to clawback.

2) Appropriate rent on Pride Park.

3) Make the club self-financing net of interest and rent.

4) Perhaps throw in inflation linked measures to protect rental and interest payments receivable.

5) When finished they can sell Derby for £1, debt free or hand it to the next guy who passes. 

Could  they even loan Derby the cash to pay down the debt and claw it their total investment etc over x years.

[Derby_Ram]

Think that one is a non-starter given their loans already in place to other clubs. 

[ExiledAjax]

On 01/05/2022 at 14:47, Derby_Ram said:

I think he's been quite astute in them since being burnt by Quantuma initially.

28 April "When asked by BBC East Midlands Today if he [Rooney] felt the deal could be done in the next seven to 10 days, the Rams boss replied: "I think it will. Having seen the progress this week, I think there is a very big chance of that. I know within seven to 10 days, there will be a big change."  

So very, very, very astute.

In my experience of completing M&A deals, some of which have been much more valuable and more complex than this one, you can do a 100 hour week, you can all stay up all night, you can sign side letters here and set conditions there. But, ultimately, there's one thing that gets a deal done - money.

[Hxj]

Selling the family silver, if true, probably gives them another fortnight or so:

Fabrizio Romano

@FabrizioRomano

·

32m

Excl. Liverpool have bought out the sell on clause from Kaide Gordon’s transfer from Derby County. #LFC Been told Liverpool & Derby County have agreed £500,000 for the removal of the 20% sell on clause which appeared in the original deal.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Hxj

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, Hxj said:

Selling the family silver, probably gives them another fortnight or so:

Fabrizio Romano

@FabrizioRomano

·

32m

Excl. Liverpool have bought out the sell on clause from Kaide Gordon’s transfer from Derby County. #LFC Been told Liverpool & Derby County have agreed £500,000 for the removal of the 20% sell on clause which appeared in the original deal.

Desperate times.

[Davefevs]

Some Derby fans think Ashley is gonna come in with a bid and gazump Kirchner!

[Sir Geoff]

No chance of Ashley gazumping Kirchener. Ashley buys distressed / liquadated businesses for knock down prices. Like a vulture he will be quietly waiting for Kirchener to pull out then at the 11th hour he will step in with a lower take it or leave it offer. Whilst quietly telling Mel to stick his stadium and then taking Derby into a groundshare somewhere close by.

[downendcity]

10 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

No chance of Ashley gazumping Kirchener. Ashley buys distressed / liquadated businesses for knock down prices. Like a vulture he will be quietly waiting for Kirchener to pull out then at the 11th hour he will step in with a lower take it or leave it offer. Whilst quietly telling Mel to stick his stadium and then taking Derby into a groundshare somewhere close by.

Mel won’t worry.

He’ll be laughing all the way to the bank as he will still have an £80m asset - it was independently valued, don't you know! 

43 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Some Derby fans think Ashley is gonna come in with a bid and gazump Kirchner!

McColl’s is looking a better deal.

[Davefevs]

40 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

No chance of Ashley gazumping Kirchener. Ashley buys distressed / liquadated businesses for knock down prices. Like a vulture he will be quietly waiting for Kirchener to pull out then at the 11th hour he will step in with a lower take it or leave it offer. Whilst quietly telling Mel to stick his stadium and then taking Derby into a groundshare somewhere close by.

Exactly.  Vulture is a perfect description.

[Davefevs]

 

[REDOXO]

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

That’s a much needed windfall. 

[chinapig]

36 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

Which implies that Kirchner is not prepared to fund the club pending the still imminent sale.

[ExiledAjax]

56 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

19 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Which implies that Kirchner is not prepared to fund the club pending the still imminent sale.

Exactly, this kind of desperate acceptance of cash, whereby they're sacrificing a potentially much larger future return for a pretty small amount right now, tells us that Kirchner is not underwriting, or guaranteeing, any expenditure at this point. If he was lending the club his credit card then why would they need to do this kind of deal? It tells me that for all of his bombast on Twitter, Kirchner is yet to pay anyone anything (other than his lawyers' interim invoice). 

[Hxj]

5 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Kirchner is yet to pay anyone anything (other than his lawyers' interim invoice).

Or final invoice, it also means that Ashley hasn't really progressed matters either.

[Davefevs]

Looking bleak.

[SBB]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

 

Hopefully Liverpool only give them .35 to the £

[ExiledAjax]

Nixon reporting that Kirchner's exclusivity period has been extended. It's behind his Patreon paywall so not sure for how long. I'd guess a month or until the end of May perhaps.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Seen a suggestion by Nixon that the magic number to avoid EFL Points penalties is £45m.

Unsure if that's including the stadium/MSD security. He seems bullish about Derby not going bust.

On another note, total radio silence on the HMRC issues and has been for some time now. The last we know is that the debt is £36m.

EFL Insolvency rules state either 25% straight away or 35% in 3 years to unsecured creditors. That'd be £9m or £12.6m over 3 years. Although Preferential and Unsecured are surely a different category.

I also don't get why they are talking about Ashley investing big when there would surely be an EFL monitored business plan for 2-3 years to reflect the advantage gained via Insolvency.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

SSN reporting that Ashley has been in touch with Quantuma but had no reply. They have a history of not replying to emails from the EFL of course.

They do not seem to know about any extension for Kirchner though.

Also that they do have access to more loans if necessary, presumably from MSD. But that would just add to the debt of course.

Sh1t creek appears to be a paddle free zone.

Edited May 9, 2022 by chinapig

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Nixon reporting that Kirchner's exclusivity period has been extended. It's behind his Patreon paywall so not sure for how long. I'd guess a month or until the end of May perhaps.

SSN saying the extension is to next weekend only.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Anyone want a good laugh? Good grief!!

(Email addresses redacted for privacy purposes etc). Which is more than the poster did. No need to redact Couhig or Gibson as we all know who they are.

I had a look at some other Derby forums for a more balanced perspective- this was one of them though!! I will stress that this was NOT from DCFCFans and tbh nobody replied to the thread in any event but it's quite the take.

Quote

Here's an exchange of emails between a Rams fan, and the EFL and the Met. Make of it what you will. It's a long read.....

From: a Rams fan
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 10:18 AM
To: efl
Subject: EFL and Derby County FC Administration
Mr and Mr
It seems clear that the case of Derby County FC administration is now a far more complicated matter
than it ought to be, particularly for the business to exit administration and/or to avoid liquidation, and
the EFL are one of the key players in them being able to do so or not.
What concerns me is the EFL feeling a little rattled and obliged to deny in a public statement there is
a ‘vendetta’ against DCFC, something its prior owner had first accused it of. Either way I believe
some of the following (not a complete listing of potential issues) needs to be explained fully and
evidenced:
Why the EFL:
1. Didn’t accept its original Disciplinary Tribunal exoneration of DCFC?
2. Didn’t accept £100k fine & no sporting sanctions handed down by the separate Tribunal on
Appeal?
3. Introduced a new rule on squad size to include U23players with 1+ appearances applied to DCFC?
4. Act by insisting Quantuma (DCFC Administrators) accept the disputed FFP penalty against DCFC?
5. Admitted in meetings with MPs and in your interview (Mr Parry’s) with The Athletic podcast that
Middlesbrough legal claims were originally against the EFL but these were withdrawn following the
EFL actions outlined above against DCFC.
6. Haven’t intervened to overcome the legal claims by 2 of its members, Middlesbrough AFC (their
owner) and Wycombe Wanderers (their owner), that are the major obstacles to saving Derby County
FC from liquidation.
Therefore it seems there’s enough evidence to support an accusation that the EFL have acted many
times having been prompted by one of its member clubs, whether through collusion or coercion, to
the detriment of another. It’s also clear that the EFL being so prompted has been/is an agent of one
of its member clubs with a fiduciary interest, via pending civil legal claims against another member.
With reference to https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/inchoateoffences#:~:text=A%20conspiracy%20is%20an%20agreement,criminal%20act%20itself%3A%20Mul
cahy%20v.
Before I feel compelled to report my concerns to the Police for possible investigation by them I want
to allow you the opportunity to provide any reassurance you can on the queries I’ve raised?
Sincerely
Rams Fan

From: EFL
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 11:33 AM
To: Rams Fan
Subject: Read: EFL and Derby County FC Administration

Your message
To: EFL
Subject: EFL and Derby County FC Administration
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 10:18:48 AM (UTC+00:00) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London
was read on Thursday, January 20, 2022 11:33:17 AM (UTC+00:00) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London.
EFL

efl
Please note our staff are working flexibly from home and the office – please continue to contact us via
telephone and email.

From: EFL
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 10:20 AM
To:  Rams Fan
Subject: Read: EFL and Derby County FC Administration

Your message
To: EFL
Subject: EFL and Derby County FC Administration
Sent: 20 January 2022 10:18:48 (UTC+00:00) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London
was read on 20 January 2022 10:20:36 (UTC+00:00) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London.
EFL

From: RamsFan
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 2:40 PM
To: The Police
Cc:  The Police
Subject: Fw: EFL and Derby County FC Administration

Dear Ms/Sirs

I, along with many thousands of others, have been keeping a watching brief on events concerning
Derby County FC that are now becoming ones of national attention and concern, including in
parliament.

Though it may well seem that the issues are of a civil and/or commercial nature there are aspects
that raise questions of possible criminality in the sphere of potential conspiracy and coercion, which
in itself may also fall into realms of being extortion, regarding the actions of the English Football
League (EFL) Middlesbrough AFC (their owner, known as Mr) and Wycombe Wanderers
FC (their owner, known as Mr).

I have communicated such a possibility to senior officers of the EFL and asked they provide
reassurance to the contrary. (see email below) That reassurance has not been forthcoming.

Therefore, because the EFL offices – 55 Blandford Street W1U 7HW - are in your jurisdiction I’m
asking you to undertake a preliminary review on the scope for a full investigation into potential
criminality outlined?

I raise this in relation to the following CPS on-line guidance:

1. Conspiracy – Statutory and Common law offences

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/inchoateoffences#:~:text=A%20conspiracy%20is%20an%20agreement,criminal%20act%20itself%3A%20Mulca
hy%20v

In relation to:

i. The nature and scope of communications and discussions between the EFL and Middlesbrough
leading to the apparent agreement for the club to cease any litigation against the EFL and for the EFL
to enact disciplinary proceedings against Derby County FC.

ii. Similarly any collusion between the EFL and Middlesbrough in regard to the EFL decision to seek to
overturn its own Disciplinary Tribunal decision to exonerate Derby County FC from all charges initially
brought against it.

iii. Again potential collusion/conspiracy with reference to the EFL actions regarding its dealings with
Quantuma, the Administrators appointed to oversee Derby County FC, to accept its proposed 9point
deduction Financial Fair Play sanction thus enabling both Middlesbrough AFC and Wycombe
Wanderers FC claims for compensation from DCFC.

iv. The continuing role of the EFL in the administration process of DCFC relating to the unwarranted
compensation claims from Middlesbrough and Wycombe Wanderers, specifically regarding the
classification of those claims as potential football creditor debts/or otherwise, effectively being a
block to the exit of Derby County FC from administration.

2. Extortion/Blackmail in regard to unwarranted demands:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/theft-act-offences#c62
Regarding:
i. Points 1.i-iv, above if not via collusion/conspiracy between the EFL and Middlesbrough AFC then by
possible coercion, by way of threats, upon the EFL by Middlesbrough AFC.
ii. The unwarranted nature of the speculative, spurious, opportunistic and inflated compensation
claims upon Derby County FC by Middlesbrough and Wycombe Wanderers seemingly being
facilitated by the EFL, effectively holding Quantuma, as Administrators appointed to DCFC, and any
potential purchasers of Derby County FC to ransom in trying to complete an effective takeover and
exit of DCFC from administration. This is reinforced by the recent announcements from
Middlesbrough and Wycombe Wanderers that they are prepared to reach a “compromise” upon
their initial claims for “more realistic” amounts.
Given it is widely reported and seemingly well understood that Derby County FC may go out of
business within a week, through enforced liquidation by its Administrators, I suggest an immediate
review of the potential scope for a fuller criminal investigation be completed and a decision taken
this week?
There’s plenty of evidence in the public domain already, but I’m content for you to contact me if you
consider I might be able to provide any assistance.
sincerely
Rams Fan


From:  The Police
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 3:04 PM
To: RamsFan
Subject: Your recent submission
Thank you for completing the form, your reference is: CDS-12425-22-0100-000.
Tell us what you think of our online service
Feedback on your experience of using our online services genuinely helps us to make sure
they work as well as possible.

From: EFL Enquiries
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 11:22 AM
To: Rams Fan
Subject: RE: EFL and Derby County FC Administration
Hello Andrew
Thank you for the email below, addressed to the CEO and Chairman of the EFL, we acknowledge your
comments and recognise that this is a concerning time for all connected to Derby County.
It is first worth clarifying that, due to a range of matters that remain ongoing, it is not possible for us to provide
detailed responses on a number of points you raise, however, as has been the case with numerous updates
and statements over the past ten days, where it is possible to provide information, we will do so.
In response to your point about a ‘vendetta’, as has been addressed by the EFL Chairman in recent media
interviews, why would we have one? The EFL is no more than the 72 Clubs it represents, the Clubs that own
the league, that set the rules. We’re trying to find the right solution for Derby County, while considering the
collective needs of the 72 in the context of our current regulations. Over recent weeks the League has been
contacted by a large number of supporters claiming there is a vendetta, and based on the intense local and
national media interest, and a range of erroneous reporting, social media comment and fan communication, the
EFL wished to clarify its position.
In respect of matters referred to regarding the original commission hearings, and sanctions on Derby County, all
of these have been reported and clarified in a number of previous statements. You can access and read the full
Independent Commission judgements from 2019-2021 via the EFL.com website here https://www.efl.com/-
more/governance/judgments-and-decisions/. It is again worth clarifying here that this is an independent
process, set out under our regulations. The EFL does not unilaterally decide the outcome of any charges
brought in respect of its rules. To this point it is again worth noting that, regarding the sporting sanctions which
were imposed this season, 12 points were deducted as consequence of the Club itself appointing
Administrators. A further 9 points were agreed with the Club, by way of an Agreed Decision which was ratified
by an Independent Disciplinary Commission Chair as per the requirements of the EFL Regulations after the
Club admitted to breaches of the EFL’s P&S rules.
Finally, your question relating to the EFL ‘intervening to overcome the legal claims by 2 of its members’, has
again been covered in a number of recent updates. While the regulations provide for arbitration between Clubs,
the EFL is not strictly party to any such proceedings. The current situation remains challenging as
Middlesbrough and Wycombe Wanderers consider their claims should be protected under the terms of the
Insolvency Policy. The Administrators disagree. Further, as those claims are not yet determined the
Administrators and bidders have no clarity on the size of any (if any) liability. As has been widely reported, that
has implications for exiting administration. The EFL has recently stated that it remains in dialogue with all
parties in an attempt to constructively move the matter forward.
Indeed, following ongoing discussion with Derby County’s Administrators, on Thursday 27 January, the EFL
released an updated statement (read here) in conjunction with Quantuma, to confirm that a month-long
extension to the deadline set for proof of funding to be provided has been agreed. This will provide the Club
with additional time to meet its ongoing obligations, continue discussions with interested bidders, alongside
providing additional time to seek clarity on the claims from Middlesbrough and Wycombe.
The latest statement follows two previous updates, including a Q&A released on Monday 17 January, and on
Thursday 20 January, which can be read here. In relation to your ongoing queries, while we are limited to what
additional detail we can provide given the ongoing discussion, both contain a range of information which, if you
have not yet read, provide some context to the current ongoing issues impacting the Club, and the EFL’s
position.
I hope that information has assisted, and please be assured that the EFL is aware of the ongoing challenges
faced and the concern from all those supporters and stakeholders impacted by ongoing matters. We remain
committed to addressing the many challenges at hand and we will look to provide updates as soon as we are
able to.
Thank you for contacting the EFL.
Kind Regards
Supporter Services Department
EFL

From: The Police
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2022 12:08 PM
To: RamsFan
Subject: Online form submission: X
Good afternoon,
With regards to your query, this would be an investigation for the FA/EFL, and not the Police at this
stage.
Kind Regards,
The Police

From: RamsFan
Sent: 29 January 2022 15:42
To: Police
Subject: Re: Online form submission: X
Thank you for the update to my email progress chasing enquiry earlier today.
Obviously I have a different opinion, based on the original submission I made to the Met in the
context of clear CPS guidance on incohate offences I referenced. I don’t see how the EFL can be
adjudged to be in charge of any investigation when it is about issues involving themselves and their
own potential wrongdoing?
I had attempted to send an email initially to the Met but this was rejected as undeliverable and I had
to resort to the on-line reporting and, because this is limited in number of characters, the ‘meat’ of
the issues I raised may have been lost in the formatting of the message?
Therefore I attach a copy of that email, along with supporting correspondence, for your records
because the proper formatting articulates more clearly the issues.
Given the Met says it has no interest or remit presently I will consider raising the issues of concern
elsewhere, probably to the group of MPs presently engaged in matters on behalf of Derby County FC.
Regards
RamsFan

From: The Police
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2022 4:48 PM
To: Rams Fan
Subject: Online form submission: X

Good Afternoon,
Please report this matter to the FA or the EFL and ask for it to be investigated.
Kind Regards,

 

Edited May 9, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

12 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Anyone want a good laugh? Good grief!!

(Email addresses redacted for privacy purposes etc). Which is more than the poster did. No need to redact Couhig or Gibson as we all know who they are.

I had a look at some other Derby forums for a more balanced perspective- this was one of them though!!

 

Classic laughable barrack room lawyer gibberish.

I know all clubs have a moronic element but they do seem to have more than their fair share.

[GreedyHarry]

44 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Anyone want a good laugh? Good grief!!

(Email addresses redacted for privacy purposes etc). Which is more than the poster did. No need to redact Couhig or Gibson as we all know who they are.

I had a look at some other Derby forums for a more balanced perspective- this was one of them though!! I will stress that this was NOT from DCFCFans and tbh nobody replied to the thread in any event but it's quite the take.

 

Forest need to add New Scotland Yard and The Met to that list of entities to blame.

Also in what world do you send an email mid-morning on a Thursday and then take ‘next steps’ Monday afternoon as you deem enough time has elapsed for a response. A whole one and two half working days later!!!

[Davefevs]

The Police, thought they’d written to Sting, Andy and Stuart!!!

[Mr Popodopolous]

Quote

Evening. My ears were burning so I thought I'd swing buy and see what's going on.

And we're discussing that cretin, Mel Morris are we? Well, as I haven't been here for a while, I'll contribute a short essay!:

Many fans were unhappy with GSE, opinions were spilt on this forum I think. Bloomer was very anti the Americans, stating that he would no longer attend games while they were running the show. This was because of a widely held idiology with football fans of all clubs that there is some devine right that fans have to demand owners spend whatever it takes to achieve success, no matter how much it is and how much money they might lose. he history of this goes back to the early days of the Premier League, with clubs like Blackburn starting the trend. Spend money and you too can win the league. Only a few years before Blackburns success they'd been an average team hovering between the second and third tiers, then came Jack Walker and... BOOM! It was Abramovich who really started the spending boom though and everyone else piled in from there. Pundits and journo's were partly to blame too, often commenting on and clubs owners not showing enough 'ambition' (not spending enough) and fans lapped it up. I heard many people complaining about GSE not showing that amnition, not 'investing' was also a popular term, as was an accusation that they were 'creaming off the profits'. Yet the club was still clearly losing money, it was right there to see but people only see what they want to see and what they wanted to see was that the Americans were bad and a new local millionaire owner was good. Mob mentality completely forgot that the GSE era brought us the best team (arguably) since our Jim Smith promotion year, and nearly managed to go up itself.

Then step forward Mel Morris. An ego 100 times the size of Afgoons stationary budget, with claims of guaranteed promotion (everyone remebers that, right?), constant manager changes, overspending on players that simply weren't worth it, the stupid 'The Derby Way' nonsense, and talks of legacy. Hindsight may be easy but there were warning signs that had me very worried: First was the spending and the kind of player that was coming in for these daft amounts. Second was some of the managerial tinkering and appointments - the majority of the fans were frothing at the mouth at the news Frank Lampard had been signed as manager but it seems I was one of a tiny minority that was not only worried but realised Morris had finally lost the plot. My reasons were that there was already talk of having to trim costs and after constant changes it was important to find an experienced manager and start to rebuild again but for the LONG TERM, not just one or two seasons of high impact. Lampard was a big name, a very high profile but he had zero managerial experience and had spent the previous year out of football playing TV personality on shows with James Corden and Holly Willoughby. Only one of two things was likely to happen with his appointment - 1. He does well and gets lured to London, probably West Ham or Chelsea (this was before Moyes had properly established himself), or 2. he does badly and we sack him. Neither was likely to last more than a year or two tops, and then we'd be back to yet another manager and another rebuild... again. And so the cycle continues. But no, he went for the big name and it just made no sense once you looked passed the hype. And guess what happened, he did well and went to Chelsea. When I say he 'did well', we kind of fluked it to get into the top 6, we rarely looked good enough and if Boro hadn't lost something like 7 games in a row then we'd never have made it. We beat Leeds on that wonderful, amazing night that I will never forget (actually, I can't remember the end of it because I'd been drinking in the Sports Bar all night and I'm not sure how I got home, but I remember the match, which is the important bit) and I do remember that we were dead and buried and Leeds were coasting before they got cocky, took their eye off the ball (literally) and gifted us the first goal. After that we were amazing but the better team certainly didn't win. he did k, basically his main contribution was to sign Mason Mount for the season. Take that away and we'd have finished mid table.

But the biggest red flag was the stadium sale. Firstly I don't agree with clubs doing it, regardless of whether it's a rule or not. But my biggest issue wasn't whether it broke a rule or didn't break a rule, it was how did we get into such a state where it was necessary in the first place. That was a sign that we were in real trouble - but did it bother most fans? Some yes, but many just accepted it because, to them, football is about the 'now'. There is a culture of impatience amongst football fans, as well as hypocricy - for example: fans of other clubs criticise Derby fans for supporting Morris and yet they would have done exactly the same thing if the situation at their club was the same - because football fans are not genetically different to each other. There is no such thing as 'this club has better fans that that club', it's a myh, a sort of fallacy fuelled by tribalsm that is both good and bad for the game. Take Chelsea as another example - some fans are saying that the Chelsea fans deserve their club to be in trouble because they have been funded by a Billionaire mate of Putin, and yet there is no club in the land that would have turned him away if he'd arrived knocking on their doors at any point priorto Russias invasion of Ukraine. Newcastle fans don't care where their owners money comes from, or what their record of human rights are, or their involvement in the humanitarian catastrophy in Yemen that they have been a part of. And Bournemouth have a Russian owner (although i think he's now a British citizen, so no sanctions likely). Did anyone at Everton care that they had a Russian owner? The point being, as long as they're spending money, fans don't care. GSE weren't spending - demonstrations outside the ground. Morris spends stupid money on players that aren't worth it and then sells the stadium - fans call him a business genius and say he's playing the EFL like a puppet.

Morris is 100% responsible for our situation. To some degree he's probably unlucky that Covid came along and wrecked any chance he had of selling or getting additional investment, which then led to administration. But when you gamble like that then you have to accept the risk and he clearly did. What is more annoying, is he still seems to seek to blame everyone else. BUT.. to some extent, fans are also to blame. Not specifially just Derby fans, all fans. Fans have to level their expectations. It's all very well and good saying that we're happy to be frugal as long as we stay in business, but how long will that last? Fans have short memories. There has to be a shift in the game, a change of thinking.

I don't know if the rumours are true about his involvement in a new bid for ownership. It seems far fetched, although with his ego?? But if it did happen, I would be done. I will not associate myself with a club with that man involved, not after what he's done, and the way he's behaved. Loyalty is one thing but I'd be embarrassed to call myself a Derby fan with him at the club. So I hope it isn't true.

From the same forum I was browsing earlier, still had a thread open.

it's a bit of an essay but thought I must post it in the interest of balance.  Not really read it properly myself but who knows maybe it represents the silent majority of Derby fans?

Edited May 9, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[downendcity]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The Police, thought they’d written to Sting, Andy and Stuart!!!

Would have been a message in a bottle.

 

[REDOXO]

On 09/05/2022 at 08:04, ExiledAjax said:

 

Exactly, this kind of desperate acceptance of cash, whereby they're sacrificing a potentially much larger future return for a pretty small amount right now, tells us that Kirchner is not underwriting, or guaranteeing, any expenditure at this point. If he was lending the club his credit card then why would they need to do this kind of deal? It tells me that for all of his bombast on Twitter, Kirchner is yet to pay anyone anything (other than his lawyers' interim invoice). 

I agree, however the whole thing is a massive game of brinkmanship. There would be no point in kirschner lending the club money if the ground, EFL or HMRC hadn’t been sorted. This doesn’t even include the money owed to Poznan/Arsenal and any amount of other creditors. 
 

I can see Kirschner walking. 
 

 

[Lanterne Rouge]

On 09/05/2022 at 18:27, Davefevs said:

The Police, thought they’d written to Sting, Andy and Stuart!!!

They`d probably have more chance of being taken seriously if they had.

[Hxj]

Being reported that Kirchner has had his exclusivity period extended to Monday, so it is all still imminent.

Bigger problem is the PAYE payment due a week today of around £500k.

[REDOXO]

31 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Being reported that Kirchner has had his exclusivity period extended to Monday, so it is all still imminent.

Bigger problem is the PAYE payment due a week today of around £500k.

Yep. The imminence is so imminent I’ll be able to taste it soon!

[Davefevs]

54 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Being reported that Kirchner has had his exclusivity period extended to Monday, so it is all still imminent.

Bigger problem is the PAYE payment due a week today of around £500k.

Thanks to Liverpool they might be ok.

[chinapig]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Thanks to Liverpool they might be ok.

It's Derby County, paying taxes is for little clubs not the likes of them.

[chinapig]

19 minutes ago, chinapig said:

It's Derby County, paying taxes is for little clubs not the likes of them.

More seriously, unless a deal is finalised by Monday is Kirchner going to cough up to meet the wage bill and other running costs? Or will they use the Liverpool money for that rather than pay the tax due?

[Marvin]

Meanwhile, Chris Kirchner is still in Thailand playing golf.