Bit of Derby info ive been told

BoroMart said:
It does, just not to teams as big as Derby.

The fact is buying Derby at this point, is purely about paying off the minimum debt, you barely get any playing contracts and you get nothing in the way of bricks and mortar. You are effectively buying a brand name and a golden share in the third tier of english football, which isn't really profitable. Third tier is effectively a lottery ticket to premier league wealth.

So let that take stock for your 50m, you buy a brand name, 5 players, and a lottery ticket. You also commit to multiple years of losses, an initial extra outlay on signing 15 players, and agreement to rent a stadium.

It's a mess
Click to expand...
Exactly this. The deal makes no sense to anyone unless its done for pure emotional reasons and there doesn't seem any rich derby fans putting their hands into their pockets a la gibson.

Someone has to blink and i think that person will inevitably be Morris. At the last minute, however sickening it is given the flagrant attempts to circumvent the FFP rules, i feel he will gift the stadium & training ground back to the club/buyer so any deal includes some bricks and mortar
 
r00fie1 said:
I dont believe we are up to our eyeballs in debt - as far as Im aware - no Championship club hasnt recorded a loss during the Covid period.
No company makes an operating profit whilst [during Covid] having to pay out wages and honour contracts, without active revenue streams, such as advertisers, sponsors, TV income, ticket sales, season cards and merchandising. We operate within the rules set by FFP and dont break the law by deliberately not paying our Taxes, fiddling our accounts, over-inflating player-values and using hard infrastructure - Pride Park - to cover unserviceable debts.
Click to expand...
Wow, you don’t believe we are up to our eyeballs in debt to GON?

Do you think there’s further to go? Do you think Mr Gibson is holding back and could pump more in if he wanted to?

We are brimming. The only thing that’s stopping us going under is GON covering it off every few years and for that we owe him a huge amount of respect because at any moment he could do what Mel has done at Derby.
 
StillCantPickAUsername said:
Wow, you don’t believe we are up to our eyeballs in debt to GON?

Do you think there’s further to go? Do you think Mr Gibson is holding back and could pump more in if he wanted to?

We are brimming. The only thing that’s stopping us going under is GON covering it off every few years and for that we owe him a huge amount of respect because at any moment he could do what Mel has done at Derby.
Click to expand...
There's a big difference between what GON are doing and what MM did. One gambled illegally and the other is meeting our debts.
 
Norman_Conquest said:
There's a big difference between what GON are doing and what MM did. One gambled illegally and the other is meeting our debts.
Click to expand...
The main difference is that Mel didn't and wouldn't put much of his own money into the club. He used club assets (stadium, training) as collateral for loans and didn't do any debt equity swap. HE gambled the clubs assets against success.

Gibsons strategy is quite the opposite, he has committed his own wealth, has swapped debt for equity, committing his own cash into the club. He hasn't gambled the clubs assets, in fact he has built them up from next to nothing to a decent stadium and great training facility.

They're polar opposites in commitment, strategy, risk, and approach.
 
Norman_Conquest said:
There's a big difference between what GON are doing and what MM did. One gambled illegally and the other is meeting our debts.
Click to expand...
The replies have moved the thread discussion on a little, I agree theres a big difference as in Gibbo stays within the rules, we’re sailing very close to FFP (because Steve Gibson wants to get the most out of the rules out of his own money which I massively respect) but there is no getting away from even though we’re within the rules we are millions in debt to GON which was my original point.
 
StillCantPickAUsername said:
The replies have moved the thread discussion on a little, I agree theres a big difference as in Gibbo stays within the rules, we’re sailing very close to FFP (because Steve Gibson wants to get the most out of the rules out of his own money which I massively respect) but there is no getting away from even though we’re within the rules we are millions in debt to GON which was my original point.
Click to expand...
You can't compare what Gibson is doing to MM. BoroMart it the nail on the head regarding one putting is own money in and the other gambling with the club's assets.
 
Norman_Conquest said:
You can't compare what Gibson is doing to MM. BoroMart it the nail on the head regarding one putting is own money in and the other gambling with the club's assets.
Click to expand...
Who writes these comparison rules? 🤣

I can’t compare, but BoroMart can and you can agree with BoroMarts comparison????

Just to be clear…I’m also comparing, acknowledging the major difference in the way the two of them make up the debt BUT there’s no getting away we are in a huge amount of debt to GON.

That is all my point was.
 
StillCantPickAUsername said:
Who writes these comparison rules? 🤣

I can’t compare, but BoroMart can and you can agree with BoroMarts comparison????

Just to be clear…I’m also comparing, acknowledging the major difference in the way the two of them make up the debt BUT there’s no getting away we are in a huge amount of debt to GON.

That is all my point was.
Click to expand...
Hey you, I write the comparison rules on here, now behave. ;)

I don't think anyone would argue that GON has put millions into the club, an amount no one could pay back and I don't think Gibson would ever call in the debt. I also think we are well within the parameters of FFP or Gibbo wouldn't have gone up against MM.
 
Last edited:
StillCantPickAUsername said:
we’re sailing very close to FFP
Click to expand...
We're not. Weren't we about 4-5m under this season.

Next season, unless we go for broke in the summer, we will be 8-10m under as the wages and transfer of Britt, Fletcher etc. start to disappear of the FFP window.

Our debt is big, far bigger than Derby's but it's serviceable because of our assets, who the debt is owed to, the terms of the debt, and the underpinning support of a chairman ready to write off debt for equity of necessary.

Of course, that isn't sustainable forever, but Gibson has shown that he doesn't double down on failure. He went for broke 4 years ago, got it horribly wrong, and has cut back ever since, to ensure debt remains serviceable.

Compare that to Mel, he doubled down on his failing, built up more debt and sold off assets, the asset:debt ratio of derby plummeted, making it no longer a viable business.
 
StillCantPickAUsername said:
I can’t compare, but BoroMart can and you can agree with BoroMarts comparison????
Click to expand...
I think it's more that I'm looking a little more holistically then just debt.

Manchester Uniteds debt rose from 350-500m last season. Around four times ours, but they are not in trouble because other metrics are important, such as income potential, assets including playing contracts and bricks and mortar etc. The playing assets alone outstrip the debt for them.

For us it isn't quite as healthy but we have around 75m in playing contract assets on the open market (probably much less in book contract assets). Tav, Fry, Spence, McNair alone are conservatively valued at 50m

It's easy to look at a single headline figure and think that is the whole story, it isn't. We are in an "ok" position financially, that could turn around badly in 18 months, or we could be very healthy with a promotion
 
Three things are true.
1. We are significantly in debt to Gibson's company. If he ever called in those debts, it looks like we would go bankrupt.
2. Since FFP came into effect over 10 years ago we have stuck to the rules and, as far as I can see, we're still comfortably sticking to them. This has required us to sell players we didn't want to and not buy players we wanted to.
3. Even though we have stuck to FFP rules, it looks like our debt to Gibson has increased over that time. FFP allows for that within limits. Basically we have made, I think, a loss everyone of the last 10 seasons bar the one in the Premier league and Gibson has covered our losses. Unless we get back into the Premier league, this will continue any year in which we don't make a substantial profit from player sales.

Derby under Mel Morris, in full knowledge of the FFP rules, tried to find ways around them on the basis that they would be in the Premier league before the authorities cottoned on. Basically the same as robbing a bank in Texas and making a run for the Mexican border. They almost got away with it. Since then, it looks like Morris has been involved in a process of delay and deceit in an attempt to get as much of his own money back as possible.

Currently, Derby are insolvent and facing having to pay their debts or be wound up. We're 'technically insolvent' but the only debt we can't meet in full belongs to Gibson and he isn't asking for his money back so we carry on.
 
BoroMart said:
We're not. Weren't we about 4-5m under this season.

Next season, unless we go for broke in the summer, we will be 8-10m under as the wages and transfer of Britt, Fletcher etc. start to disappear of the FFP window
Click to expand...
Well let’s get on Gibbos back and demand the extra 4-5m that he owes the club then 🤣

We go as close as Gibson decides he is willing to lose but is within the rules and I think 4-5m is pretty close to the limit if the limit is roughly 34m per season (I know it’s not quite that but for a simpleton like me it’s easier to compare).

I’m not saying we’re in the realms of Derby or other teams…I’ve said many times Gibson is sticking within the rules, but he’s taking us as close to them as he can without breaking the rules so we have a good chance of success.

His whole issue about fairness was because other teams were not sticking to the rules and so had an unfair advantage. That to me says if the rules were 50m that he’d go close to that limit as well.

Guys a phucking legend may I add in.
 
BoroMart said:
I think it's more that I'm looking a little more holistically then just debt.

Manchester Uniteds debt rose from 350-500m last season. Around four times ours, but they are not in trouble because other metrics are important, such as income potential, assets including playing contracts and bricks and mortar etc. The playing assets alone outstrip the debt for them.

For us it isn't quite as healthy but we have around 75m in playing contract assets on the open market (probably much less in book contract assets). Tav, Fry, Spence, McNair alone are conservatively valued at 50m

It's easy to look at a single headline figure and think that is the whole story, it isn't. We are in an "ok" position financially, that could turn around badly in 18 months, or we could be very healthy with a promotion
Click to expand...
I agree with this 👍🏻
 
StillCantPickAUsername said:
Wow, you don’t believe we are up to our eyeballs in debt to GON?

Do you think there’s further to go? Do you think Mr Gibson is holding back and could pump more in if he wanted to?

We are brimming. The only thing that’s stopping us going under is GON covering it off every few years and for that we owe him a huge amount of respect because at any moment he could do what Mel has done at Derby.
Click to expand...
Im certain we would all prefer an informed comment and yours will be welcomed Im sure.(y)
 
The EFL insisted that the administrators provide proof of funding to the end of the season to avoid any such scenario. If the EFL are content that has been shown then I can't see why the admins would pack it in before then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top