'I tell you they were all in a row...and then mysteriously...not.'
It's shame, we could have had the vote by now and if it was a no the board could have been negotiating alternatives...
Wonder if this is deliberately unclear, would be helpful to know if he asked for more time or was even aware that his lawyers couldn't provide whatever documents had been requested. Would hate to miss out on the right investment due to a technicality but it doesn't shout professionalism on his part either.
@StrongestTeam said:
Wonder if this is deliberately unclear, would be helpful to know if he asked for more time or was even aware that his lawyers couldn't provide whatever documents had been requested. Would hate to miss out on the right investment due to a technicality but it doesn't shout professionalism on his part either.
Setting up that splinter meeting a few days before a key stage in the situation didn't smack pro either.
@StrongestTeam said:
Wonder if this is deliberately unclear, would be helpful to know if he asked for more time or was even aware that his lawyers couldn't provide whatever documents had been requested. Would hate to miss out on the right investment due to a technicality but it doesn't shout professionalism on his part either.
Setting up that splinter meeting a few days before a key stage in the situation didn't smack pro either.
No, but it made some sense if he thought, as people had been suggesting, that he was being ignored or fobbed off.
Difficult to know much more unless he wants to share. Either way it's time for us to hear more from Bill and Jim.
So the trust statement says they decided themselves that they would pick the American bid over Harman's before he withdrew, would have been nice to see both but barring far more info or clear accusation from Harman it seems like time to move on and hope this hasn't put them off.
The Trust were always going to support the American bid.
Now that Harman has withdrawn his interest, I hope that Stroud still has a third option should the Americans not get the necessary 75% vote. The American's charge on Adams Park becomes even more worrying now.
Wonder if our American friends might be tempted back to Derby rather than investing in Wycombe? I suspect they haven't got the capital to finance a club gearing up for a return to the Premier League with all the costs and debt that entails - but if they're tempted to go back as part of a wider consortium again our Trust Board may have to go back to Andrew Harman cap-in-hand before very long...
@JohnnyAllAlone said: @Mooneyman Surely it shows how it has been managed since they sold their interest in Derby ?
Bearing in mind their intention to sell on Wycombe once they have "stabilised" us, it is certainly worrying to me that the purchaser they selected has so quickly put Derby in such a perilous situation. Remember we will have no say in the identity or nature of our subsequent owner.
@aloysius said:
Wonder if our American friends might be tempted back to Derby rather than investing in Wycombe? I suspect they haven't got the capital to finance a club gearing up for a return to the Premier League with all the costs and debt that entails - but if they're tempted to go back as part of a wider consortium again our Trust Board may have to go back to Andrew Harman cap-in-hand before very long...
Derby are currently 18 points off the automatic promotion spots, so the liklehood of their return to the Premier this season is debatable, despite their massive spending. Surely they must also be close to breaching the FFP rules with this spending.
All this perceived "Power" in making sure we do the right thing etc etc with the American lot is lovely. But they're specifically trying to do us up and lob us on to anyone who has the wad.
Mel Morris is considering selling Derby County for a token price of just £1 with the owner primarily focused on having his debts repaid through the sale process.
The club’s most recently published accounts to June 2017 show that Morris has lent the holding company who own Derby, Sevco 5112, £95 million in loans, a figure which will have increased significantly in the interim as they are losing between £1 million and £2 million each month.
Morris has attracted interest from the United States and the Far East since letting it be known he would welcome fresh investment as Derby’s attempt to win promotion to the Premier League has stalled in recent months, but has yet to receive a formal bid.
The Candy Crush tycoon has been Derby’s sole owner since 2015, which has proved to be an expensive enterprise as the club have lost money every year since 2008, the last time they were in the top flight.
Morris is understood to have invested £161 million in the club and after losing money for nine successive years he warned in the club’s latest accounts published last year: “At these levels it is not sustainable, end of, we have got to deal with that. It’s impossible to spend at the level we have year after year.”
Morris has attempted to control costs since then by switching the focus of Derby’s transfer policy from proven Championship players to younger loan signings under manager Frank Lampard, but at more than £40 million the club’s wage bill is one of the highest in the division.
In the 2017 accounts the club’s wage bill was given as £34.6 million, but those results only cover a ten-month period and the costs rise to £39.6 million if annualised over 12 months. In reality Derby’s wage bill is likely to be significantly higher, as in 2016 a new company called Derby County Academy Limited was created, with the contracts of almost 100 apprentices, coaches and staff being taken off the club’s books and transferred to the new company.
Morris is understood to have received several proposals from interested parties willing to take on a percentage of the club’s debt to him, plus the promise of further staged payments if Derby are promoted to the Premier League, but has yet to find any acceptable and is holding out for a better deal.
Lampard’s side remain in contention for the Championship play-offs, but have fallen to eighth in the table after winning just one of their past seven league games.
In addition to growing weary of funding losses Morris has also become disillusioned by the wider football landscape, particularly his clashes with the EFL board over the Championship television deal and his legal battle with the former Derby chief executive Sam Rush, which was settled out of court.
@peterparrotface - Interesting that a Championship club having been "stabilised" by Mr Luby's company and subsequently sold to a very wealthy owner have made losses for TEN consecutive years. They are now making MONTHLY losses about three times the amount of our ANNUAL losses.
Is private ownership the real answer to all our problems? Perhaps we should ask a few Bolton supporters!
Quote from Mel Morris in September 2015 when he acquired ownership of Derby County: ‘I wish to pay tribute to the North American ownership group who provided the finance and leadership stability the club needed after relegation from the Premier League.
What else would you have expected him to say at the time? What does the evidence afterwards suggest about how sustainable a state they left the club in? Or is this all Mel Morris's doing?
I wouldn’t have ‘expected’ him to say anything that he didn’t believe in and I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions about the club’s subsequent financial demise.
But this is is important Alan. However great and trustworthy the Americans are, what they choose to do with our club once they've 'stabilised' it, is completely out of our hands. We don't get another vote.
@mooneyman said: @peterparrotface - Interesting that a Championship club having been "stabilised" by Mr Luby's company and subsequently sold to a very wealthy owner have made losses for TEN consecutive years. They are now making MONTHLY losses about three times the amount of our ANNUAL losses.
Is private ownership the real answer to all our problems? Perhaps we should ask a few Bolton supporters!
Still waiting and seeing really. Be interested to see if a percentage of Trust ownership is part of their plans.
I understand that, but we’ve been told that the current trust run model is unsustainable and at this time the Americans’ bid is the only one on the table. You are right to be cautious about the future, but we have to deal with the reality of where we are now.
@glasshalffull said:
I wouldn’t have ‘expected’ him to say anything that he didn’t believe in and I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions about the club’s subsequent financial demise.
Like you when Alan Smith and Tony Adams were appointed?
@glasshalffull said:
I wouldn’t have ‘expected’ him to say anything that he didn’t believe in and I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions about the club’s subsequent financial demise.
So you think the American's sold the club to a good buyer?
Comments
Or kidnapped Andy's ducks @Wendoverman!
'I tell you they were all in a row...and then mysteriously...not.'
It's shame, we could have had the vote by now and if it was a no the board could have been negotiating alternatives...
Wonder if this is deliberately unclear, would be helpful to know if he asked for more time or was even aware that his lawyers couldn't provide whatever documents had been requested. Would hate to miss out on the right investment due to a technicality but it doesn't shout professionalism on his part either.
Setting up that splinter meeting a few days before a key stage in the situation didn't smack pro either.
No, but it made some sense if he thought, as people had been suggesting, that he was being ignored or fobbed off.
Difficult to know much more unless he wants to share. Either way it's time for us to hear more from Bill and Jim.
If Bill and Jim are still in the game! It wouldn’t surprise me to find out they have also decided to pull out.
So the trust statement says they decided themselves that they would pick the American bid over Harman's before he withdrew, would have been nice to see both but barring far more info or clear accusation from Harman it seems like time to move on and hope this hasn't put them off.
The Trust were always going to support the American bid.
Now that Harman has withdrawn his interest, I hope that Stroud still has a third option should the Americans not get the necessary 75% vote. The American's charge on Adams Park becomes even more worrying now.
Well. What a waste of time that all was.
It was never majority v minority anyway. I was majority now v majority in two years (by which time there probably wouldn't be another way out anyway)
Both bids were always looking at a majority...and we all know majority would eventually become total.
So how exactly are the shares distributed at the moment?
Someone posted this on the Facebook page. I don't subscribe/pay for the Times so can't read it all but might be of interest regarding the state of Derby County these days. Anyone who gets the Times able to fill in any details? https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/derby-county-owner-mel-morris-trying-to-sell-club-for-1-69hfjcxpj?fbclid=IwAR02tfp9Oa7sKwYWY3H97vnfScyVNTdDf53IJU0awn2VGdW1RPf7NLY2Aco
Just shows how successful American investment is long term!!
@Mooneyman Surely it shows how it has been managed since they sold their interest in Derby ?
Wonder if our American friends might be tempted back to Derby rather than investing in Wycombe? I suspect they haven't got the capital to finance a club gearing up for a return to the Premier League with all the costs and debt that entails - but if they're tempted to go back as part of a wider consortium again our Trust Board may have to go back to Andrew Harman cap-in-hand before very long...
Bearing in mind their intention to sell on Wycombe once they have "stabilised" us, it is certainly worrying to me that the purchaser they selected has so quickly put Derby in such a perilous situation. Remember we will have no say in the identity or nature of our subsequent owner.
Derby are currently 18 points off the automatic promotion spots, so the liklehood of their return to the Premier this season is debatable, despite their massive spending. Surely they must also be close to breaching the FFP rules with this spending.
@mooneyman , that's the rub isn't it.
All this perceived "Power" in making sure we do the right thing etc etc with the American lot is lovely. But they're specifically trying to do us up and lob us on to anyone who has the wad.
Mel Morris is considering selling Derby County for a token price of just £1 with the owner primarily focused on having his debts repaid through the sale process.
The club’s most recently published accounts to June 2017 show that Morris has lent the holding company who own Derby, Sevco 5112, £95 million in loans, a figure which will have increased significantly in the interim as they are losing between £1 million and £2 million each month.
Morris has attracted interest from the United States and the Far East since letting it be known he would welcome fresh investment as Derby’s attempt to win promotion to the Premier League has stalled in recent months, but has yet to receive a formal bid.
The Candy Crush tycoon has been Derby’s sole owner since 2015, which has proved to be an expensive enterprise as the club have lost money every year since 2008, the last time they were in the top flight.
Morris is understood to have invested £161 million in the club and after losing money for nine successive years he warned in the club’s latest accounts published last year: “At these levels it is not sustainable, end of, we have got to deal with that. It’s impossible to spend at the level we have year after year.”
Morris has attempted to control costs since then by switching the focus of Derby’s transfer policy from proven Championship players to younger loan signings under manager Frank Lampard, but at more than £40 million the club’s wage bill is one of the highest in the division.
In the 2017 accounts the club’s wage bill was given as £34.6 million, but those results only cover a ten-month period and the costs rise to £39.6 million if annualised over 12 months. In reality Derby’s wage bill is likely to be significantly higher, as in 2016 a new company called Derby County Academy Limited was created, with the contracts of almost 100 apprentices, coaches and staff being taken off the club’s books and transferred to the new company.
Morris is understood to have received several proposals from interested parties willing to take on a percentage of the club’s debt to him, plus the promise of further staged payments if Derby are promoted to the Premier League, but has yet to find any acceptable and is holding out for a better deal.
Lampard’s side remain in contention for the Championship play-offs, but have fallen to eighth in the table after winning just one of their past seven league games.
In addition to growing weary of funding losses Morris has also become disillusioned by the wider football landscape, particularly his clashes with the EFL board over the Championship television deal and his legal battle with the former Derby chief executive Sam Rush, which was settled out of court.
@peterparrotface - Interesting that a Championship club having been "stabilised" by Mr Luby's company and subsequently sold to a very wealthy owner have made losses for TEN consecutive years. They are now making MONTHLY losses about three times the amount of our ANNUAL losses.
Is private ownership the real answer to all our problems? Perhaps we should ask a few Bolton supporters!
Quote from Mel Morris in September 2015 when he acquired ownership of Derby County: ‘I wish to pay tribute to the North American ownership group who provided the finance and leadership stability the club needed after relegation from the Premier League.
And he added: ‘They have been terrific to work with.’
What else would you have expected him to say at the time? What does the evidence afterwards suggest about how sustainable a state they left the club in? Or is this all Mel Morris's doing?
I wouldn’t have ‘expected’ him to say anything that he didn’t believe in and I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions about the club’s subsequent financial demise.
But this is is important Alan. However great and trustworthy the Americans are, what they choose to do with our club once they've 'stabilised' it, is completely out of our hands. We don't get another vote.
Still waiting and seeing really. Be interested to see if a percentage of Trust ownership is part of their plans.
I understand that, but we’ve been told that the current trust run model is unsustainable and at this time the Americans’ bid is the only one on the table. You are right to be cautious about the future, but we have to deal with the reality of where we are now.
Like you when Alan Smith and Tony Adams were appointed?
So you think the American's sold the club to a good buyer?