|
Post by dirtclod on Sept 19, 2021 18:50:10 GMT
I'm guessing the EFL knew it would of been lost in Derbys Black Hole whilst all the other clubs would of put it to genuine use during the pandemic. Which would tend to suggest the writings been on the wall for Derby for a very long time, which I guess everyone thought anyway, but know the time has come to face up to their years of dodgy dealings & thinking they could buy their way to the Premier League. Aston Villa were potentially in a very similar position the year they got promoted as they were literally on their arse after trying to buy their way back to the top table. It was only getting promoted & having new investors that put them back on track & where they are today. Tight margins.. It was specifically to pay the PAYE, not to be used for something else and according to Derby's statement last night the EFL blocked them from taking it up. I know it's Derby's fault but as a fan of a club rather than football in general I can empathise totally with the Derby fans. In the days when FFP is supposed to protect clubs for the fans what exactly have the league done to help Derby fans? They've allowed themselves to be coerced by Middlesborough to carry out a futile but expensive investigation into a perfectly legal sale of the ground, they've realised 4 years late that Derby's accounts were not correct, they have taken 18 months now to sort that problem out, they put a transfer embargo on Derby counting their youth team who played one FA cup match for covid reasons as senior players and blocked a loan that was available to all other clubs. Forget the club for a minute and all it's wrong doings and ask if this had happened to Stoke what would you think of the EFL's role in all this. Much though I hate Derby fans (mainly because of their adoration of Charlie George and their blaming of Stoke for an injury to him which ultimately cost them the League title according to them), this sort of thing should not get to this situation. As with Bury and Macclesfield they allowed the board to get away with it until it was too late. These posts it on the head for me. Totally Derby's fault but I also empathize with their fans. A glaring spotlight needs focused on the EFL as to how they go about running a league on hindsight & horseshit. Because now, like in the Bury & Macclesfield cases, they're about to cannibalize yet another club. What kind of "league" repeatedly eats its own?
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Sept 19, 2021 19:07:54 GMT
Given how his squad was decimated over the summer, the transfer embargo they are under and now this, you have to take your hat off to Rooney in what is his first managerial job. He's doing an excellent job there under exceptionally trying circumstances. I'm very impressed. True enough mate, fans love to abuse Rooney but as you say, with the hand he’s been dealt he’s doing really well so far. I don't get the hate for him. One of the finest players of his generation, pretty much won the lot as a player and is rich enough to not get involved in management at all, nevermind at a stereotypical basketcase. He clearly loves the sport, has a lot to offer and wants to offer it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 19:19:14 GMT
True enough mate, fans love to abuse Rooney but as you say, with the hand he’s been dealt he’s doing really well so far. I don't get the hate for him. One of the finest players of his generation, pretty much won the lot as a player and is rich enough to not get involved in management at all, nevermind at a stereotypical basketcase. He clearly loves the sport, has a lot to offer and wants to offer it. Because he’s a filthy cheat who pays for sex despite having a wife and kids?
|
|
|
Post by hughjarse on Sept 19, 2021 19:38:56 GMT
I don't get the hate for him. One of the finest players of his generation, pretty much won the lot as a player and is rich enough to not get involved in management at all, nevermind at a stereotypical basketcase. He clearly loves the sport, has a lot to offer and wants to offer it. Because he’s a filthy cheat who pays for sex despite having a wife and kids? Putting that aside, you've got to love him though 🤣
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Sept 19, 2021 19:43:47 GMT
Speaking to a Derby fan yesterday and he informed me that Mel was the brainchild of candy crush and sold it for a hell of a lot of money, well I never!
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Sept 19, 2021 19:48:24 GMT
Morris took a risk that didn’t work and has probably fucked up their Club but he appears to be a genuine fan who has spent a serious wedge of his own money and isn’t well. I’ve a bit of empathy for him
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 19, 2021 19:50:57 GMT
Speaking to a Derby fan yesterday and he informed me that Mel was the brainchild of candy crush and sold it for a hell of a lot of money, well I never! He was born and raised in the Littleover area of Derby. Out of school, he first worked as a tile and flooring manager at a company he helped to establish in Spain, before venturing into entrepreneurship. After leaving the flooring firm, he returned to the UK to develop a dating website called uDate, which he went on to sell for £100 million. He used the money secured from the sale to invest in Prevx, an internet security firm, which was later sold to Webroot. He then helped to set up King, which he chaired from 2003 onwards until stepping down in 2014. When King was sold to Activision Blizzard, Morris collected £450 million.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Sept 19, 2021 19:57:24 GMT
Speaking to a Derby fan yesterday and he informed me that Mel was the brainchild of candy crush and sold it for a hell of a lot of money, well I never! He was born and raised in the Littleover area of Derby. Out of school, he first worked as a tile and flooring manager at a company he helped to establish in Spain, before venturing into entrepreneurship. After leaving the flooring firm, he returned to the UK to develop a dating website called uDate, which he went on to sell for £100 million. He used the money secured from the sale to invest in Prevx, an internet security firm, which was later sold to Webroot. He then helped to set up King, which he chaired from 2003 onwards until stepping down in 2014. When King was sold to Activision Blizzard, Morris collected £450 million. Great use of wiki there CP1, I did the the same just to make sure the old boy I spoke to wasn't off his rocker! Spoke to a few rams fans on the way back to the train station and just like most footy fans they were great, and were extremely worried about their future and really felt for them as fans who like us love their club.
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Sept 19, 2021 21:21:59 GMT
27th May 2019 was the date that ultimately placed Derby in the mess they are in today! The Derby v Villa Play Off Final was quite simply more than a game to win promotion from the Championship to The Premier League.
Both clubs had gambled huge wages & transfer fees in the previous years, not including massive outgoings on managers wages and compensation packages etc!
This game was basically a sink or swim occasion & the ramifications of defeat were simply unbearable to both clubs.
As we know Villa took the honours that day & are now flourishing in the Premier League after a shaky first season. They have very wealthy owners who can now spend as they please. & they ultimately didn't have to face another Championship Season, a season that would have seen them face EFL sanctions for breaching FFP regulations aswell as their parachute payments having also tried up! Villa were in a mess and potentially could be in exactly the same position as what Derby find themselves in right now.
Derby had gambled with Finances and that gamble failed miserably under the Wembley Arch.
For the fans it was pure delight at either winning the final & getting promoted or losing and being to resigned to Championship football for another season.
For the money men & decision makers of both Villa & Derby, 27th May 2019 was the most nervous they'd of likely ever been as so much more than football was at stake.
|
|
|
Post by Gob Bluth on Sept 20, 2021 9:38:10 GMT
For anyone interested this is the hour long interview that Mel Morris has given to Radio Derby today on their administration and championship finances.A very good interview and an insight into FFP and how hard it is in the Championship Hats off to him for doing this and I have complete sympathy for his policy on amortisation of players, I think the EFL are wrong or certainly when listening to his side of the story they're wrong. The cracks start to show where he dances between saying he wants to put in big investment and it's not about money but says it's not sustainable to stick with 1.5m a month. He continually fails to accept his policy of gambling on promotion while claiming it's not about money but simply put he doesn't have the money to back that gamble. It's clear he wants to be seen as the victim and a hero. The frustration from the EFL about selling the stadium is crystalised at the end of the interview where Derby are in Administration but Morris still owns the stadium via a company not in administration. Many clubs get something of a new slate but there's a chance that the new owners will end up sticking the ground as debt against the new club.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Sept 20, 2021 16:31:25 GMT
For anyone interested this is the hour long interview that Mel Morris has given to Radio Derby today on their administration and championship finances.A very good interview and an insight into FFP and how hard it is in the Championship Hats off to him for doing this and I have complete sympathy for his policy on amortisation of players, I think the EFL are wrong or certainly when listening to his side of the story they're wrong. The cracks start to show where he dances between saying he wants to put in big investment and it's not about money but says it's not sustainable to stick with 1.5m a month. He continually fails to accept his policy of gambling on promotion while claiming it's not about money but simply put he doesn't have the money to back that gamble. It's clear he wants to be seen as the victim and a hero. The frustration from the EFL about selling the stadium is crystalised at the end of the interview where Derby are in Administration but Morris still owns the stadium via a company not in administration. Many clubs get something of a new slate but there's a chance that the new owners will end up sticking the ground as debt against the new club. The stuff on amortisation was laughable, it was solely designed to let him throw the dice on trying to get promoted, there are many many reasons no one else follows this method of accounting and it is specifically prohibited whatever he claims.
|
|
|
Post by Gob Bluth on Sept 21, 2021 8:55:44 GMT
Hats off to him for doing this and I have complete sympathy for his policy on amortisation of players, I think the EFL are wrong or certainly when listening to his side of the story they're wrong. The cracks start to show where he dances between saying he wants to put in big investment and it's not about money but says it's not sustainable to stick with 1.5m a month. He continually fails to accept his policy of gambling on promotion while claiming it's not about money but simply put he doesn't have the money to back that gamble. It's clear he wants to be seen as the victim and a hero. The frustration from the EFL about selling the stadium is crystalised at the end of the interview where Derby are in Administration but Morris still owns the stadium via a company not in administration. Many clubs get something of a new slate but there's a chance that the new owners will end up sticking the ground as debt against the new club. The stuff on amortisation was laughable, it was solely designed to let him throw the dice on trying to get promoted, there are many many reasons no one else follows this method of accounting and it is specifically prohibited whatever he claims. I don't know anywhere near enough about it. Is it prohibited in all industries or just football and why is it not allowed? I completely see your point that it moves things in a positive way on the balance sheet for him which is what he wanted but I agree with him that players values don't depreciate in a linear way.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Sept 21, 2021 9:14:42 GMT
The stuff on amortisation was laughable, it was solely designed to let him throw the dice on trying to get promoted, there are many many reasons no one else follows this method of accounting and it is specifically prohibited whatever he claims. I don't know anywhere near enough about it. Is it prohibited in all industries or just football and why is it not allowed? I completely see your point that it moves things in a positive way on the balance sheet for him which is what he wanted but I agree with him that players values don't depreciate in a linear way. Derby were assigning residual values to players contracts (intangible assets) based on their directors valuations of what they think they might be worth in a few years time even though they have no contract in place and the fact there is nothing they can do if the player decides to run his contract down and leave on a free or go to a tribunal nevermind suffer a serious injury, whilst he was right in saying at the end of the contract the amount expensed is the same what he didn't say is I believe derby when they offer contract extensions after a few years they extend the amortisation period for the remaining original transfer fee too. There's plenty more on previous pages but the few accountants on this board including me agree we have never come across such a policy.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 21, 2021 9:15:48 GMT
I don't know anywhere near enough about it. Is it prohibited in all industries or just football and why is it not allowed? I completely see your point that it moves things in a positive way on the balance sheet for him which is what he wanted but I agree with him that players values don't depreciate in a linear way. Derby were assigning residual values to players contracts (intangible assets) based on their directors valuations of what they think they might be worth in a few years time even though they have no contract in place and the fact there is nothing they can do if the player decides to run his contract down and leave on a free or go to a tribunal nevermind suffer a serious injury, whilst he was right in saying at the end of the contract the amount expensed is the same what he didn't say is I believe derby when they offer contract extensions after a few years they extend the amortisation period for the remaining original transfer fee too. There's plenty more on previous pages but the few accountants on this board including me agree we have never come across such a policy. It's bonkers that anyone has any sympathy for Derby re this.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Sept 21, 2021 9:19:28 GMT
It all has to do with tangible assets which are physical things and intangible assets which are things written on paper. Football players contracts are written on paper so are seen as intangible and is how most football clubs class their players for amortisation. However Derby argue that players are commodities like machines etc so classed their playing staff as tangible assets. As players may, for example suffer career ending injuries I can see Derby's argument and I think the problem arose because the EFL never laid down in stone that they had to be intangible. Normally employees are not at risk like football players and are not bought with money for their potential which may never be fulfilled. I can totally see Derby's reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 21, 2021 9:22:54 GMT
It all has to do with tangible assets which are physical things and intangible assets which are things written on paper. Football players contracts are written on paper so are seen as intangible and is how most football clubs class their players for amortisation. However Derby argue that players are commodities like machines etc so classed their playing staff as tangible assets. As players may, for example suffer career ending injuries I can see Derby's argument and I think the problem arose because the EFL never laid down in stone that they had to be intangible. Normally employees are not at risk like football players and are not bought with money for their potential which may never be fulfilled. I can totally see Derby's reasoning. No one else can You can't say player will be worth three times his current value when he's not under contract that long multiple times and expect to be taken seriously
|
|
|
Post by Gob Bluth on Sept 21, 2021 9:24:19 GMT
I don't know anywhere near enough about it. Is it prohibited in all industries or just football and why is it not allowed? I completely see your point that it moves things in a positive way on the balance sheet for him which is what he wanted but I agree with him that players values don't depreciate in a linear way. Derby were assigning residual values to players contracts (intangible assets) based on their directors valuations of what they think they might be worth in a few years time even though they have no contract in place and the fact there is nothing they can do if the player decides to run his contract down and leave on a free or go to a tribunal nevermind suffer a serious injury, whilst he was right in saying at the end of the contract the amount expensed is the same what he didn't say is I believe derby when they offer contract extensions after a few years they extend the amortisation period for the remaining original transfer fee too. There's plenty more on previous pages but the few accountants on this board including me agree we have never come across such a policy. Thank you and I see, it sounds much more like Enron's marketing dividends when you explain it.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Sept 21, 2021 9:26:00 GMT
Derby were assigning residual values to players contracts (intangible assets) based on their directors valuations of what they think they might be worth in a few years time even though they have no contract in place and the fact there is nothing they can do if the player decides to run his contract down and leave on a free or go to a tribunal nevermind suffer a serious injury, whilst he was right in saying at the end of the contract the amount expensed is the same what he didn't say is I believe derby when they offer contract extensions after a few years they extend the amortisation period for the remaining original transfer fee too. There's plenty more on previous pages but the few accountants on this board including me agree we have never come across such a policy. It's bonkers that anyone has any sympathy for Derby re this. Indeed and I don't see Morris either as a good guy he has bailed out to protect the reminder of his fortune and thrown people into the employment queue at least Simon Jordan went all in and lost his fortune.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Sept 21, 2021 9:33:38 GMT
It all has to do with tangible assets which are physical things and intangible assets which are things written on paper. Football players contracts are written on paper so are seen as intangible and is how most football clubs class their players for amortisation. However Derby argue that players are commodities like machines etc so classed their playing staff as tangible assets. As players may, for example suffer career ending injuries I can see Derby's argument and I think the problem arose because the EFL never laid down in stone that they had to be intangible. Normally employees are not at risk like football players and are not bought with money for their potential which may never be fulfilled. I can totally see Derby's reasoning. Derbys reasoning only arose as a means to allow Morris to circumvent FFP not from a desire to improve the quality of accounting. There are many flaws in derby's arguments that you put forward mostly Derby do not own / control the players, if a player wanted to quit and become an ice cream man apart from suing for breach of contract there is nothing they can do, they can keep the players registration to stop another club signing them but even then once the contract expires the ice cream man could go and play for whoever they want. Everything they did was designed to cheat FFP.
|
|
|
Post by Billy the kid on Sept 21, 2021 13:59:05 GMT
So when are they getting their pount deduction
|
|
|
Post by dirtclod on Sept 21, 2021 14:49:29 GMT
So when are they getting their pount deduction In about 7 years once the "suddenly Derby gets to negotiate their punishment" circus is over.
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Sept 21, 2021 18:40:36 GMT
It all has to do with tangible assets which are physical things and intangible assets which are things written on paper. Football players contracts are written on paper so are seen as intangible and is how most football clubs class their players for amortisation. However Derby argue that players are commodities like machines etc so classed their playing staff as tangible assets. As players may, for example suffer career ending injuries I can see Derby's argument and I think the problem arose because the EFL never laid down in stone that they had to be intangible. Normally employees are not at risk like football players and are not bought with money for their potential which may never be fulfilled. I can totally see Derby's reasoning. With all the apologising you've been doing for them on this thread one would think you're related to old Mel
|
|
|
Post by BuzzB on Sept 21, 2021 21:11:59 GMT
12 points docked tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 22, 2021 12:43:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rt Hon Reverend Luvpump on Sept 22, 2021 12:44:52 GMT
12 point deduction only like 6 points as they play us twice this season 3 all ready in the bag 😉
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 22, 2021 13:15:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by HarryTheHat on Sept 22, 2021 13:18:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Sept 22, 2021 13:21:25 GMT
No messing around from the BBC.....
|
|
|
Post by apb1 on Sept 22, 2021 13:23:50 GMT
No messing around from the BBC..... What about the other 9 for their previous 'crimes?' Is that just being forgotten about? '
|
|
|
Post by BuzzB on Sept 22, 2021 13:42:33 GMT
No messing around from the BBC..... What about the other 9 for their previous 'crimes?' Is that just being forgotten about? ' thats to follow
|
|