Jump to content
IGNORED

Derby County

havanatopia

By havanatopia
in Football Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

PHILINFRANCE

PHILINFRANCE

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Leveller said:

I’ve now read on the BBC website that Quantuma asked Rooney to stay on. Seems odd, if they’re acting for the creditors.

A higher value for the Club with, rather than without WR, plus more likelihood of soon to be out of contract players staying on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Leveller

Leveller

Posted
Posted
Just now, PHILINFRANCE said:

A higher value for the Club with, rather than without WR, plus more likelihood of soon to be out of contract players staying on?

With his contract costing them £4-5m pa in League One? Guaranteed future loss surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PHILINFRANCE

PHILINFRANCE

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Leveller said:

With his contract costing them £4-5m pa in League One? Guaranteed future loss surely?

Wasn’t that (effectively) being paid by the sponsors?

Will they stay, now WR has gone?

Obviously, I have no idea, but I should imagine they will now lose out on some SKY live match coverage, with its associated fees, and, presumably, other potential sponsorship, thus reducing the Club’s overall value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
downendcity

downendcity

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Wasn’t that (effectively) being paid by the sponsors?

Will they stay, now WR has gone?

Obviously, I have no idea, but I should imagine they will now lose out on some SKY live match coverage, with its associated fees, and, presumably, other potential sponsorship, thus reducing the Club’s overall value.

IIRC, 32red were already Derby's shirt sponsor, but when he signed they agreed to increase the sponsorship deal in return for Rooney wearing shirt no.32. The increase in the annual sponsorship deal was (conveniently) the amount of Rooney's annual wage. As the sponsor was paying DCFC, not Rooney, it sidestepped any problems with third party ownership of the player.

Funny that the increase in sponsorship was for the amount of WR's wages and the valuation of Pride Park enabled a profit on "sale" sufficient to clear their ffp problems! :whistle:

I'm guessing that, as Rooney is no longer with the club, if 32red remain as shirt sponsor the deal will revert to the value it was prior to WR's signing  - or , of course a lesser amount if they had a relegation clause in the sponsorship contract!  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

David Clowes has bid accepted for Derby County as Liam Rosenior is put in interim charge - BBC Sport

Amazing how quickly this has happened. 

Why did Quantuma waste so much time on pointless bids up to now? They really don`t deserve to get paid.

My guess is Clowes bought the stadium on the basis of Quantuma's assurance that Kirchner's deal for the club would go through. Clowes could then collect the rent. I don't think Clowes was interested in buying the club at that stage.

Quite why anybody would be convinced by either Quantuma or Kirchner is a mystery we may never get the answer to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lanterne Rouge

Lanterne Rouge

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, chinapig said:

My guess is Clowes bought the stadium on the basis of Quantuma's assurance that Kirchner's deal for the club would go through. Clowes could then collect the rent. I don't think Clowes was interested in buying the club at that stage.

Quite why anybody would be convinced by either Quantuma or Kirchner is a mystery we may never get the answer to.

it`s like the changing of the seasons or the tides of the sea.

Seems rather appropriate really.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Midred

Midred

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, chinapig said:

My guess is Clowes bought the stadium on the basis of Quantuma's assurance that Kirchner's deal for the club would go through. Clowes could then collect the rent. I don't think Clowes was interested in buying the club at that stage.

Quite why anybody would be convinced by either Quantuma or Kirchner is a mystery we may never get the answer to.

It will be interesting if Clowes changes his mind after looking at the books!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ScottishRed

ScottishRed

Posted
Posted

I hope this works out, as long as the creditors and, most importantly, HMRC, get paid in full.

Anything else is completely unacceptable and opens the floodgates to more Mel Morris’s.

On the current situation that the country is in there will be an utter outcry if the Government is seen to be helping fund a football club - and rightly so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monkeh

Monkeh

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

I hope this works out, as long as the creditors and, most importantly, HMRC, get paid in full.

Anything else is completely unacceptable and opens the floodgates to more Mel Morris’s.

On the current situation that the country is in there will be an utter outcry if the Government is seen to be helping fund a football club - and rightly so.

The government can't help as it breaches the state and rules by fifa and uefa, which would see England banned from international tournaments and domestic clubs banned from Europe, I think

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BTRFTG

BTRFTG

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, chinapig said:

My guess is Clowes bought the stadium on the basis of Quantuma's assurance that Kirchner's deal for the club would go through. Clowes could then collect the rent. I don't think Clowes was interested in buying the club at that stage.

Quite why anybody would be convinced by either Quantuma or Kirchner is a mystery we may never get the answer to.

Or..... if the deal for the club doesn't go through what better a Derby fan crying crocodile tears bemoaning he tried his best to save his beloved club but where's he now going to find a property developer to take Pride Park off his hands?

(Looks in the mirror .....)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveF

DaveF

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

He'll go to better club then us I think davef imo

Yeah I expect so, has had awful luck with ACL injuries though so hopefully he's past them.

Apparently Derby are willing to let him out on loan but don't want to sell which seems a bit odd considering their situation...

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/derby-county-krystian-bielik-transfer-7222537

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Midred

Midred

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Wages will be far too high for Lg1, so I guess they think they’ll get some mug to loan him and pay wages whilst they get back to the Champ!!!

I suspect new owners will have a different view to the administrators!

They still think that they can have their cake, and eat it!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BTRFTG

BTRFTG

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, East Londoner said:

Although it’s only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it at the end of the day 

Exactly, but why in the last few months would an asset lose 75% of its supposed value? Derby should be made to demonstrate a valid reason for the depreciation, given they went to such lengths to argue it was worth £81m to bolster their FFP/ P&S position when all knew that was cock and bull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Exactly, but why in the last few months would an asset lose 75% of its supposed value? Derby should be made to demonstrate a valid reason for the depreciation, given they went to such lengths to argue it was worth £81m to bolster their FFP/ P&S position when all knew that was cock and bull.

Especially since DCFC didn't receive a penny of the £81m.

Though the EFL did object but an independent commission found in Derby's favour so it's hard to see what else the EFL could do now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

Exactly, but why in the last few months would an asset lose 75% of its supposed value? Derby should be made to demonstrate a valid reason for the depreciation, given they went to such lengths to argue it was worth £81m to bolster their FFP/ P&S position when all knew that was cock and bull.

Seems to include some kind of debt write off of £59m for the balance? Not looked properly for a while but Kieran Maguire suggested it.

On the plus side Couhig hasn't gone away- good.

Think he's a bit kind to the Derby fans tbh- of them, although easy to say, if he read DCFCFans he might form a different view about a good chunk.

On a serious note, I don't see too much wrong in what he said here? 

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BTRFTG

BTRFTG

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Seems to include some kind of debt write off of £59m for the balance? Not looked properly for a while but Kieran Maguire suggested it.

On the plus side Couhig hasn't gone away- good.

Think he's a bit kind to the Derby fans tbh- of them, although easy to say, if he read DCFCFans he might form a different view about a good chunk.

On a serious note, I don't see too much wrong in what he said here? 

Just an accounting write off for Morris. In truth it's no write off at all.

Think of something you've bought. Tell the world it's now worth 10 times as much. Sell it for purchase price. Huge write down your side but your actual loss? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Barrs Court Red

Barrs Court Red

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Just an accounting write off for Morris. In truth it's no write off at all.

Think of something you've bought. Tell the world it's now worth 10 times as much. Sell it for purchase price. Huge write down your side but your actual loss? 

It’s an accounting trick the wealthy use with art. Buy it, have it “valued” at a much higher price and then donate it somewhere. The tax write off is higher than the original purchase price.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/06/27/exclusive-wayne-rooneys-agent-investigated-secretly-paying-derby/?utm_content=football&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1656362705

Stretford paid the wages!

Well well so he is the man Kieran Maguire was talking about as being involved in football and close to the club when people were asking who paid the wages. And now he can't get the money back from Kirchner it seems.

A man with a chequered past plus a bit of a shyster in Kirchner. Rooney needs to choose his friends more carefully.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Well well so he is the man Kieran Maguire was talking about as being involved in football and close to the club when people were asking who paid the wages. And now he can't get the money back from Kirchner it seems.

A man with a chequered past plus a bit of a shyster in Kirchner. Rooney needs to choose his friends more carefully.

…guess that is why loyal-Wayne left WRDC then!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hxj

Hxj

Posted
Posted

The debtor for the Stadium in the Football Club accounts does not appear in the Administrator's paperwork.  It must therefore have been paid off before Administration, more than likely by cash circulating from Morris to the Stadium Group to the Football Club, and back up through the ownership chain to Morris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PHILINFRANCE

PHILINFRANCE

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/06/27/exclusive-wayne-rooneys-agent-investigated-secretly-paying-derby/?utm_content=football&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1656362705

Stretford paid the wages!

 

3 hours ago, chinapig said:

Well well so he is the man Kieran Maguire was talking about as being involved in football and close to the club when people were asking who paid the wages. And now he can't get the money back from Kirchner it seems.

A man with a chequered past plus a bit of a shyster in Kirchner. Rooney needs to choose his friends more carefully.

From the Derby forum ?.

Typical, isn't it? All these agents sapping the game dry, and the one time an agent puts money into a club he gets punished for it.

I wonder if Quantuma were aware of this breach of the Agents' Code of Practice.

Edited by PHILINFRANCE
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

 

From the Derby forum ?.

Typical, isn't it? All these agents sapping the game dry, and the one time an agent puts money into a club he gets punished for it.

I wonder if Quantuma were aware of this breach of the Agents' Code of Practice.

Well, Derby fans have a history of being happy to have rule breakers associated with their club after all.

These are the people who worshipped Morris (ha ha, EFL on strings style) and thought Kirchner, a transparently iffy character, was their saviour.

Plus there was talk of Stretford being on the Board. No conflict of interest there then.

I assume Quantuma were just desperate for the money so didn't think twice.

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

chinapig

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Wayne Rooney's agent Paul Stretford agent settles with 16 players over ‘secret payments’ | Daily Mail Online

I know it's desperate times for Derby, but reading his wikipedia page, is this really the man you want involved in your club?

Paul Stretford - Wikipedia

 

 

And...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/dec/29/paul-stretford-wayne-rooney-football-association

Would have fitted right in at Derby then.?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NcnsBcfc

NcnsBcfc

Posted
Posted
Just now, chinapig said:

Loyal as in loyal to Stretford. Who'd have guessed?

Isn't it the case though, that an Agent can't act for the player , and the club?

A bit of a conflict of interest. Plus an agent paying the wages of players that he doesn't represent? That's a minefield of probable rule breaking.

No wonder the EFL are looking into it all.

Derby just can't bring themselves to do the right thing at anytime can they? Their reputation as a club is in tatters now with the authorities. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Isn't it the case though, that an Agent can't act for the player , and the club?

A bit of a conflict of interest. Plus an agent paying the wages of players that he doesn't represent? That's a minefield of probable rule breaking.

No wonder the EFL are looking into it all.

Derby just can't bring themselves to do the right thing at anytime can they? Their reputation as a club is in tatters now with the authorities. 

Actually it is allowed I think though it shouldn't be imo.

An agent on a club's Board is another level though.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Isn't it the case though, that an Agent can't act for the player , and the club?

A bit of a conflict of interest. Plus an agent paying the wages of players that he doesn't represent? That's a minefield of probable rule breaking.

No wonder the EFL are looking into it all.

Derby just can't bring themselves to do the right thing at anytime can they? Their reputation as a club is in tatters now with the authorities. 

Yep, happens all the time…whether it should be is another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Midred said:

Wasn't this Birmingham's problem during the time of a previous manager or am I thinking about Wolves?

You may be thinking of Jorge Mendes at Wolves. Despite being an agent he is their de facto head of recruitment.

The FA decided that was fine, though he has been involved in cases of alleged tax evasion, third party ownership and others.

As Gareth Southgate said, love the game, hate the business.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted (edited)

I suppose I should ask- Stretford paying the wages as per the reports- any blame that can be attached to Derby or is it solely a agent/EFL/FA and maybe ex manager issue?

Secondly- still no sign of those accounts, either with the EFL let alone online- I assume that the indicative figures are accurate but why do they not release...if all submitted as part of the takeover fair enough, but six or seven years of the accounts compiled correctly seems a must- 6 years in the public domain, up to last season to the Football League. What are they trying to hide exactly- if indeed they are.

I wouldn't lift the Embargo until the full Group accounts in the correct format, are with the EFL at a minimum- from 2015/16 to 2020/21 and the as up to date figures as possible for 2021/22.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I suppose I should ask- Stretford paying the wages as per the reports- any blame that can be attached to Derby or is it solely a agent/EFL/FA and maybe ex manager issue?

Secondly- still no sign of those accounts, either with the EFL let alone online- I assume that the indicative figures are accurate but why do they not release...if all submitted as part of the takeover fair enough, but six or seven years of the accounts compiled correctly seems a must- 6 years in the public domain, up to last season to the Football League. What are they trying to hide exactly- if indeed they are.

I’ve no idea, but had Stratford not paid them, they’d have likely missed the wages payment for this month and get minus 3 points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’ve no idea, but had Stratford not paid them, they’d have likely missed the wages payment for this month and get minus 3 points.

Indeed- you and me both, -3 if not but I wonder if the mechanism was authorised/made transparent to the EFL. Went on for much longer if true but I know Birmingham are under Investigation for issues of ownership and presumably funding.

image.png.9ebf929a5988b391fc34aa80cf7df192.png

The spelling on 17 is terrible! That aside, quite simply I don't see what they have to gain from 16.2 and the P&S bit- 16.3 is excused while in admin but not when they exit...and even then there was an expectation to publish on the Derby website by the due date for 2020/21 from the Agreed Decision. No way should the EFL substantially lift the Embargo until all aspects are rectified. Logically it should be resolved on the takeover as that goes through...

Any theories @Hxj as to why the accounts might still be hidden from view not only from the public but the EFL as well.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hxj

Hxj

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Any theories @Hxj as to why the accounts might still be hidden from view not only from the public but the EFL as well.

Because no one has prepared them.  Administrators don't need to.  The EFL will need to decide if they take the point further, I understand that they have detailed figures. 

Still likely that 'NewCo' will be used so there will be no further accounts for the companies currently in Administration.

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

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Because no one has prepared them.  Administrators don't need to.  The EFL will need to decide if they take the point further, I understand that they have detailed figures. 

Still likely that 'NewCo' will be used so there will be no further accounts for the companies currently in Administration.

Thanks. Although it rather goes against the EFL "Agreed Decision" to publish on the website e.g. the 2020/21 ones.

EFL have detailed figures- would that be in your view the correct format and covering the 6-7 years...certainly don't think the EFL should be under any obligation to lift the current embargo until such time as they receive them in full if detailed isn't full- stalemate in other words.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites
downendcity

downendcity

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’ve no idea, but had Stratford not paid them, they’d have likely missed the wages payment for this month and get minus 3 points.

If they are not paid, am I right that players can tear up their contracts and leave on a free?

They might not then be able to muster a 5-a-side team!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CyderInACan

CyderInACan

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, downendcity said:

If they are not paid, am I right that players can tear up their contracts and leave on a free?

They might not then be able to muster a 5-a-side team!

Think so. Also other circumstances could also mean that could happen too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
View from the Dolman

View from the Dolman

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Sky just said under a business plan with restrictions on fees, wages, etc for new signings.

Yep, the EFL statement says:

Quote

As part of the conditions of continuing membership in the EFL, the Club, whilst remaining under a registration embargo, will be permitted to sign new players in accordance with the terms of a business plan.

The plan, which has been jointly agreed by the new ownership and the EFL, includes restrictions in respect of transfers fees, player wages and agents’ fees. Any application to register players must comply with the terms of those agreed plans. 

https://www.efl.com/news/2022/july/efl-statement-derby-county-exit-administration/

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...