| Is anyone else thinking the same? 14:29 - Apr 5 with 1871 views | STYG |
That Derby seem to be getting an awful lot of time and chances that other clubs didn't get?
I will be honest and admit I may be wrong. Maybe Bury and Bolton and the likes of Macclesfield had the same time and it was completely different with their finances.
But it seems like the EFL are doing everything that can to help Derby out and prevent them from starting in the Derby and Mickleover Division Three next season.
There was even mention (in a reputable newspaper) that the EFL were considering a 15 point deduction (a further one) this season when it should be next, in the next few weeks, if they are likely already down by then.
Given that Bury were seemingly ruined by one person and Bolton had some complex issues, it seems highly unfair that Derby (who a lot of commentators seem to think have bent or broken the rules for many years) seem to get chance after chance.
On an ITFC level, it's also not ideal having another huge club in our division for future seasons. |  | | |  |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 14:35 - Apr 5 with 1825 views | hype313 |
Simon Jordan was saying earlier that the average time in Administration is 9 months, so in essence they are still within that timeframe.
Also sounded like this Chris Kirschner is now the preferred bidder, apparently he's worth $7b, so not ideal if they comedown and don't face a points deduction. |  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 15:42 - Apr 5 with 1679 views | Tangledupin_Blue |
At least they weren't given a sparkling new stadium, bought and paid for from lottery funds, a la West Ham... |  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 15:51 - Apr 5 with 1628 views | pointofblue |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 15:42 - Apr 5 by Tangledupin_Blue |
At least they weren't given a sparkling new stadium, bought and paid for from lottery funds, a la West Ham... |
Manchester City were similar weren’t they? The Etihad was originally built for the Commonwealth Games. | |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:18 - Apr 5 with 1568 views | Illinoisblue |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 15:51 - Apr 5 by pointofblue |
Manchester City were similar weren’t they? The Etihad was originally built for the Commonwealth Games. |
And let’s not forget Leicester - now heralded as a model well-run ‘smaller’ club - cheated/finessed their way through FFP rules not so long ago. |  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:19 - Apr 5 with 1562 views | jayessess |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 14:35 - Apr 5 by hype313 |
Simon Jordan was saying earlier that the average time in Administration is 9 months, so in essence they are still within that timeframe.
Also sounded like this Chris Kirschner is now the preferred bidder, apparently he's worth $7b, so not ideal if they comedown and don't face a points deduction. |
Bury's financial troubles emerged in December 2018 and they'd been expelled from the football league by August 2019, so things do sometimes happen faster.
I guess Derby's case is helped by them (a) being a bigger club (b) being worth more money to buyers/creditors (c) having played most of their season already. |  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:45 - Apr 5 with 1486 views | hype313 |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:19 - Apr 5 by jayessess |
Bury's financial troubles emerged in December 2018 and they'd been expelled from the football league by August 2019, so things do sometimes happen faster.
I guess Derby's case is helped by them (a) being a bigger club (b) being worth more money to buyers/creditors (c) having played most of their season already. |
Whilst it's not fair and should be one rule for everyone, but I do wonder if it was easier for HMRC to swallow Bury's £800k debt as opposed to Derby's £30m.... | |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:52 - Apr 5 with 1465 views | jayessess |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:45 - Apr 5 by hype313 |
Whilst it's not fair and should be one rule for everyone, but I do wonder if it was easier for HMRC to swallow Bury's £800k debt as opposed to Derby's £30m.... |
Yeah, best result for everyone in football and everyone they owe money to is that someone steps in and steadies the ship. Which is presumably why no-one is in any hurry to push them over the edge. | |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 17:34 - Apr 5 with 1346 views | Guthrum |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:19 - Apr 5 by jayessess |
Bury's financial troubles emerged in December 2018 and they'd been expelled from the football league by August 2019, so things do sometimes happen faster.
I guess Derby's case is helped by them (a) being a bigger club (b) being worth more money to buyers/creditors (c) having played most of their season already. |
It is the Administrators' responsibility to get as much for the club as possible - which is easier with a saleable prospect and buyers at least interested, than with a financial basket case and nobody sniffing around with actual, non-imaginary money.
Likewise, creditors are more prepared to hang on if they think there's at least some chance of getting a bit back, rather than that obviously not being the case. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 18:13 - Apr 5 with 1285 views | Dennyx4 |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 17:34 - Apr 5 by Guthrum |
It is the Administrators' responsibility to get as much for the club as possible - which is easier with a saleable prospect and buyers at least interested, than with a financial basket case and nobody sniffing around with actual, non-imaginary money.
Likewise, creditors are more prepared to hang on if they think there's at least some chance of getting a bit back, rather than that obviously not being the case. |
I do think Derby have been very fortunate with how the Administrators have worked for them, choosing not to sell players in the January window, has assisted the club, but not helped the creditors.
Lawrence (for example) would have been snapped up by another club for £1 to £2m, if Derby had been forced to sell. |  | | |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 19:35 - Apr 5 with 1134 views | HighgateBlue |
Which are the EFL decisions to which you object? |  | | |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 19:49 - Apr 5 with 1097 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
I think it's about cash flow isn't it?
They can remain in admin for an initial 12 months and then apply for an extension for up to 6 months, so I assume as long as there is the cash flow to keep the club running I think that's the time frame, not sure what happens if you get to that time frame, one assumes wound up or sold to a highest bidder at that point? |  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 20:21 - Apr 5 with 1004 views | BlueBadger |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:18 - Apr 5 by Illinoisblue |
And let’s not forget Leicester - now heralded as a model well-run ‘smaller’ club - cheated/finessed their way through FFP rules not so long ago. |
Bolton. Heralded as the model for the model smaller club aspiring to become and established premier league side. Turned out the business plan was 'don't get relegated for fook's sake'. |  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 20:23 - Apr 5 with 1000 views | Plums |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 15:42 - Apr 5 by Tangledupin_Blue |
At least they weren't given a sparkling new stadium, bought and paid for from lottery funds, a la West Ham... |
Ah the HMRC stadium, what a fairy story |  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 20:29 - Apr 5 with 976 views | Keno |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:18 - Apr 5 by Illinoisblue |
And let’s not forget Leicester - now heralded as a model well-run ‘smaller’ club - cheated/finessed their way through FFP rules not so long ago. |
But at least plucky little Bournemouth set the example for how to do it within the FPP rules [Post edited 5 Apr 2022 20:29]
|  |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 20:35 - Apr 5 with 948 views | Veggie |
To paraphrase another user on here, they do have a very famous manager. Probably something to do with it. |  | | |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 22:53 - Apr 5 with 771 views | Guthrum |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 18:13 - Apr 5 by Dennyx4 |
I do think Derby have been very fortunate with how the Administrators have worked for them, choosing not to sell players in the January window, has assisted the club, but not helped the creditors.
Lawrence (for example) would have been snapped up by another club for £1 to £2m, if Derby had been forced to sell. |
But, on the other hand, the club are worth more in the Championship (which was feasible, even at the end of January) than League One. So keeping the team together can be seen as protecting value.
And those players can be sold, anyway, in a few weeks time. | |
| |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 09:51 - Apr 6 with 537 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Is anyone else thinking the same? on 16:52 - Apr 5 by jayessess |
Yeah, best result for everyone in football and everyone they owe money to is that someone steps in and steadies the ship. Which is presumably why no-one is in any hurry to push them over the edge. |
His bid is apparently going to refuse to pay creditors the 25p in £ demanded by EFL to exit administration correctly.
So they’ll start on at least -15pts next season if they would be relegated this season without it.
Also dependent on Council buying ground and leasing back as he can’t afford it |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
