Another Chris Kirchner extension incoming (is that three or four now)? He's on the socials bleating about getting abuse of some random fan, looking ever more like another tyre kicker. What a shambles - if it were a smaller club they'd have been kicked out of the league by now.
Looks like deal done. Ironically the first reply was someone saying ‘show me the money’. I hope he is ready for the expectation from fans of big money signings and ‘pissing the league’.
Everything aside, I’m happy to take a step back and just be pleased for the fans. Sure they appear to have many that haven’t quite grasped the concept of what actually happened, why, and how it might happen again. But any fan in their situation appears to be able to breathe a sigh of relief this morning.
A separate discussion obviously about who will be paid what in terms of debt not yet settled.
"Again, unfortunately, some of the smaller businesses may got to the wall."
I know, so unfortunate for them. And their employees, and their families, but hey, what can you do, eh? As long as Wayne gets his 40 new players and the fans get the big name stars they've been talking about, everyone's happy.
Well, except the poor sods who lose their living and stuff. But y'know, omelettes and eggs...
We'll get no big named stars. The brainless few are the ones spouting that. From what has been said it's looking very much like the business plan is to run at break even at worst and maybe even make a profit which, in L1, would be something. CK will probably fund any buys up front and then recoup that when the season ticket money comes in.
Yes, as I said previously, unfortunate, very much so. What's on the table is the best it's going to get. Current creditors will only get 35% of their debt paid. That, however, is better than the 10% to 15% they'd get if the club was liquidated. Far from ideal though, isn't it?
You also missed the point that liquidation would see even more businesses cut back or go to the wall. YOU seem to have forgotten those poor sods who "lose their living and stuff".
This is not good for creditors, It never is in an insolvency case. Football? Lost its innocence years ago. MM gambled and lost and the creditors are paying for it financially. Football is a BUSINESS not a sport anymore. This one was run badly for 6 years. No getting away from that. The business survives thanks to this deal. Some creditors won't. DCFC surviving means many other businesses whose income is derived from fans, not from the club, will also survive which they wouldn't have had DCFC folded. Pubs, restaurants, fast food outlets and others... or don't you care about them?
@StrongestTeam said:
Still subject to the ground being bought by the council too so not quite done yet
Reading the Derby Councils' website it would appear that they have to make 13 million pounds cutbacks this coming year, despite an eleven million pound boost from central government. Derby Council saying it's not enough. Will be interesting to see how they are going to balance the books if they are buying a football stadium on top?
@StrongestTeam said:
Still subject to the ground being bought by the council too so not quite done yet
Reading the Derby Councils' website it would appear that they have to make 13 million pounds cutbacks this coming year, despite an eleven million pound boost from central government. Derby Council saying it's not enough. Will be interesting to see how they are going to balance the books if they are buying a football stadium on top?
In reality they are probably just guaranteeing Derby a loan, it'll be either from reserves they aren't allowed to spend or borrowed and paid back out of rent at far better rates than would be available to the club in its current state. Should come with lots of conditions, probably won't. Should be very grateful if it happens, probably won't be.
@StrongestTeam said:
Still subject to the ground being bought by the council too so not quite done yet
Reading the Derby Councils' website it would appear that they have to make 13 million pounds cutbacks this coming year, despite an eleven million pound boost from central government. Derby Council saying it's not enough. Will be interesting to see how they are going to balance the books if they are buying a football stadium on top?
In reality they are probably just guaranteeing Derby a loan, it'll be either from reserves they aren't allowed to spend or borrowed and paid back out of rent at far better rates than would be available to the club in its current state. Should come with lots of conditions, probably won't. Should be very grateful if it happens, probably won't be.
Interesting thought. How would it work? Someone, a bank maybe, loans CK the money to pay MM the £20M so he can pay back what he owes MSD and the Council acts as guarantor? Who would pay the interest? CK/DCFC presumably?
In reality they are probably just guaranteeing Derby a loan, it'll be either from reserves they aren't allowed to spend or borrowed and paid back out of rent at far better rates than would be available to the club in its current state. Should come with lots of conditions, probably won't. Should be very grateful if it happens, probably won't be.
Surely if they are taking it from reserves they aren't allowed to spend then they are spending it? Or maybe I'm missing the elephant in the room!?
I would have thought the Council would simply get a loan to buy the ground and the rent they would charge Derby would at least cover the interest payments. The Council would then have an asset and be able to use (let) the ground for other purposes when not used by Derby. The problem will arise when the club get behind with the rent due to more important expenditure like big money signings and Rooney's wages!!
@Ed_ said:
Lucky we never had the sort of people at our club who would run the finances into the ground and end up accidentally owning former club assets. No, wait ...
Some of them will be sitting in the soft seats in the middle on the 21st. They have positions at our club that they should be ashamed of. Any good they did, in the early years, were ruined when they supported and encouraged SH and “the wasps”. We are here DESPITE you, not because of you.
The Couhigs are class compared to those so called Grandees.
The Couhigs are absolute class. Beyond comparison. Their vision and the way they have transformed the whole set-up at Adams Park is little short of miraculous. Beyond our wildest dreams just a few seasons ago.
I’m not sure who @wandering_jock and @NiceCarrots have in mind when they resurrect memories of less successful times and those responsible but we mustn’t overlook the success (however serendipitous) of Trevor Stroud and his Trust Board colleagues in persuading the Couhigs to take on our struggling club.
In reality they are probably just guaranteeing Derby a loan, it'll be either from reserves they aren't allowed to spend or borrowed and paid back out of rent at far better rates than would be available to the club in its current state. Should come with lots of conditions, probably won't. Should be very grateful if it happens, probably won't be.
Surely if they are taking it from reserves they aren't allowed to spend then they are spending it? Or maybe I'm missing the elephant in the room!?
No, you're bang on, god knows what kind of discussions are going on in the council but the idea will be that this could provide a community asset for years to come, save jobs etc and crucially it's a fixed asset that they own and can potentially sell later or remortgage, or more likely it could just be a short term thing if Kirchner finds the £ or if he makes them more viable for another buyer in a year or two, could the council use the funds better, almost certainly but they wouldn't necessarily then get it back.
@StrongestTeam said:
Still subject to the ground being bought by the council too so not quite done yet
Reading the Derby Councils' website it would appear that they have to make 13 million pounds cutbacks this coming year, despite an eleven million pound boost from central government. Derby Council saying it's not enough. Will be interesting to see how they are going to balance the books if they are buying a football stadium on top?
In reality they are probably just guaranteeing Derby a loan, it'll be either from reserves they aren't allowed to spend or borrowed and paid back out of rent at far better rates than would be available to the club in its current state. Should come with lots of conditions, probably won't. Should be very grateful if it happens, probably won't be.
Interesting thought. How would it work? Someone, a bank maybe, loans CK the money to pay MM the £20M so he can pay back what he owes MSD and the Council acts as guarantor? Who would pay the interest? CK/DCFC presumably?
You'd think either the council borrows the money at a cheaper rate or "finds it" in reserves to pay out Mel (a little shameful either way tbh) and then they own the ground. It's up to Mel to pay MSD, Kirchner doesn't get involved with Mel, negotiates rent with the council.
Crucially the council may have rainy day reserves and see this as transferring that cash into a saleable asset.
@mooneyman said:
I would have thought the Council would simply get a loan to buy the ground and the rent they would charge Derby would at least cover the interest payments. The Council would then have an asset and be able to use (let) the ground for other purposes when not used by Derby. The problem will arise when the club get behind with the rent due to more important expenditure like big money signings and Rooney's wages!!
Now you're guessing. Just because a few dumbass fans are "looking forward to splashing huge amounts on players" you take it as gospel. I don't believe that will happen. After exiting Admin there will still be some sanctions on us next season as happens with all clubs exiting Admin. They could be any or all of not being allowed to pay transfer or loan fees, limited length of contracts that may be offered, squad size, wage cap and maybe others. As far as I am aware, those decisions have yet to be made by the EFL. This makes it virtually impossible to make offers to players as that offer might end up exceeding any limits the EFL has in mind. All we can do is offer a deal with the caveat that the contract will have to change or be annulled if it exceeds EFL limits.
@mooneyman said:
I would have thought the Council would simply get a loan to buy the ground and the rent they would charge Derby would at least cover the interest payments. The Council would then have an asset and be able to use (let) the ground for other purposes when not used by Derby. The problem will arise when the club get behind with the rent due to more important expenditure like big money signings and Rooney's wages!!
Now you're guessing. Just because a few dumbass fans are "looking forward to splashing huge amounts on players" you take it as gospel. I don't believe that will happen. After exiting Admin there will still be some sanctions on us next season as happens with all clubs exiting Admin. They could be any or all of not being allowed to pay transfer or loan fees, limited length of contracts that may be offered, squad size, wage cap and maybe others. As far as I am aware, those decisions have yet to be made by the EFL. This makes it virtually impossible to make offers to players as that offer might end up exceeding any limits the EFL has in mind. All we can do is offer a deal with the caveat that the contract will have to change or be annulled if it exceeds EFL limits.
Still, why let facts ruin a good dig?
Controls over who you can buy aren't for punishment. They will be in place to protect the players and other stakeholders unless and until you can prove you can pay for the contracts you are offering. Feel this is pretty key to some of the Derby fan angst with the league.
Interesting thought. How would it work? Someone, a bank maybe, loans CK the money to pay MM the £20M so he can pay back what he owes MSD and the Council acts as guarantor? Who would pay the interest? CK/DCFC presumably?
Yes, it happens all the time. A acts as guarantor for a loan to B (think parent acts as guarantor for child maybe putting up their own home as collateral) no problem at all with it, so long as B makes the payments on loan/interest.
Where it all goes tits up is if B defaults on the loan and leaves A to pick up the pieces.
@Ed_ said:
Lucky we never had the sort of people at our club who would run the finances into the ground and end up accidentally owning former club assets. No, wait ...
Some of them will be sitting in the soft seats in the middle on the 21st. They have positions at our club that they should be ashamed of. Any good they did, in the early years, were ruined when they supported and encouraged SH and “the wasps”. We are here DESPITE you, not because of you.
The Couhigs are class compared to those so called Grandees.
The Couhigs are absolute class. Beyond comparison. Their vision and the way they have transformed the whole set-up at Adams Park is little short of miraculous. Beyond our wildest dreams just a few seasons ago.
I always thought when it was a plan for our council to buy us a lovely Rugby stadium, how could they justify funding a business that benefits a small percentage of their voters when they could not fill in the holes in the bloody roads. If cash-strapped Derby council do end up pumping money in, I would be interested to see how it plays with voters.
@Wendoverman said:
how could they justify funding a business that benefits a small percentage of their voters when they could not fill in the holes in the bloody roads.
@Wendoverman said:
how could they justify funding a business that benefits a small percentage of their voters when they could not fill in the holes in the bloody roads.
Hmm... free hospitality?
Local government officials swayed by money and freebies??? Shurely not!
It certainly did not work for the local populace in Bucks and played a part in the stadium getting nixed, didn't it? (Or am I getting it all wrong.)
@Wendoverman said:
how could they justify funding a business that benefits a small percentage of their voters when they could not fill in the holes in the bloody roads.
Hmm... free hospitality?
The sell to the local voters will be that they aren't funding the club, they are using their status and funds to temporarily help them help themselves, save the club and jobs, and the club will be expected to pay back all and more long term via rent or eventual buyback.
Wether anyone believes that it will come to pass is an obvious issue, The councillors either believe or are just too weak to be seen to say no. And there's the photo ops and the hospitality....
Another issue (even if the funds don't go straight out to people in genuine urgent need) is whether other organisations, believe they would be able to both provide a safer better return on that investment and also do some good by maybe building houses or care facilities, and an extension of that, wether they were given due hearing for any application they wished to make. I'm sure the council have people asking for some of what is their money non stop.
Surely the sell to the electorate will be that with the Council's help Derby could be a Premiership team again in three years and in the Champions League in 5!
IF all Derby Council are doing is acting as guarantor, for a £20M loan to pay back MM/MSD then there really isn't anything wrong with that.
HOWEVER, they'll still have to justify putting their good name and credit rating at risk.
Heaven forbid DCFC default on loan repayments, then the whole pack of cards might fall down and Derby itself gets wiped from the map!
Can someone remind me why Mel Morris continuing to own the football ground is bad and Derby Council owning the football ground is good? As far as I can see, in either case, Derby County will be tenants, so why does the council have to get involved at all?
@Ed_ said:
Can someone remind me why Mel Morris continuing to own the football ground is bad and Derby Council owning the football ground is good? As far as I can see, in either case, Derby County will be tenants, so why does the council have to get involved at all?
Depends how any deal is structured. If Derby Council only act as guarantor for a loan, thus enabling DCFC to buy the ground from MM, then DCFC become the owners and wouldn't just be tenants.
That's a big difference for DCFC.
@Ed_ said:
Can someone remind me why Mel Morris continuing to own the football ground is bad and Derby Council owning the football ground is good? As far as I can see, in either case, Derby County will be tenants, so why does the council have to get involved at all?
It's mainly because MM is a tosser and they want him gone isn't it, also they /he have got loans secured on the stadium so it clouds the debt clearance effort I think if he's still there
@Twizz - I don't think Derby Council are acting as guarantors for a DCFC purchase of the ground, I think they are planning on buying the ground themselves and DCFC then become their tenants. @StrongestTeam - all of which falls under the Derby County's problem banner, seems like the council are forking out a lot of money so that Chris doesn't have to deal with Mel which is a weird priority to have when you are cutting costs across the board.
Comments
Another Chris Kirchner extension incoming (is that three or four now)? He's on the socials bleating about getting abuse of some random fan, looking ever more like another tyre kicker. What a shambles - if it were a smaller club they'd have been kicked out of the league by now.
Looks like deal done. Ironically the first reply was someone saying ‘show me the money’. I hope he is ready for the expectation from fans of big money signings and ‘pissing the league’.
Everything aside, I’m happy to take a step back and just be pleased for the fans. Sure they appear to have many that haven’t quite grasped the concept of what actually happened, why, and how it might happen again. But any fan in their situation appears to be able to breathe a sigh of relief this morning.
A separate discussion obviously about who will be paid what in terms of debt not yet settled.
The plan seems to be for multimillionaire Kirchner to have cash-strapped Derby Council buy the stadium off a reluctant Mel Morris, which doesn’t look like a done deal to me at all. https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/derby-news/drastic-multi-million-pound-cuts-6369873
We'll get no big named stars. The brainless few are the ones spouting that. From what has been said it's looking very much like the business plan is to run at break even at worst and maybe even make a profit which, in L1, would be something. CK will probably fund any buys up front and then recoup that when the season ticket money comes in.
Yes, as I said previously, unfortunate, very much so. What's on the table is the best it's going to get. Current creditors will only get 35% of their debt paid. That, however, is better than the 10% to 15% they'd get if the club was liquidated. Far from ideal though, isn't it?
You also missed the point that liquidation would see even more businesses cut back or go to the wall. YOU seem to have forgotten those poor sods who "lose their living and stuff".
This is not good for creditors, It never is in an insolvency case. Football? Lost its innocence years ago. MM gambled and lost and the creditors are paying for it financially. Football is a BUSINESS not a sport anymore. This one was run badly for 6 years. No getting away from that. The business survives thanks to this deal. Some creditors won't. DCFC surviving means many other businesses whose income is derived from fans, not from the club, will also survive which they wouldn't have had DCFC folded. Pubs, restaurants, fast food outlets and others... or don't you care about them?
Still subject to the ground being bought by the council too so not quite done yet
Reading the Derby Councils' website it would appear that they have to make 13 million pounds cutbacks this coming year, despite an eleven million pound boost from central government. Derby Council saying it's not enough. Will be interesting to see how they are going to balance the books if they are buying a football stadium on top?
In reality they are probably just guaranteeing Derby a loan, it'll be either from reserves they aren't allowed to spend or borrowed and paid back out of rent at far better rates than would be available to the club in its current state. Should come with lots of conditions, probably won't. Should be very grateful if it happens, probably won't be.
Interesting thought. How would it work? Someone, a bank maybe, loans CK the money to pay MM the £20M so he can pay back what he owes MSD and the Council acts as guarantor? Who would pay the interest? CK/DCFC presumably?
Surely if they are taking it from reserves they aren't allowed to spend then they are spending it? Or maybe I'm missing the elephant in the room!?
I would have thought the Council would simply get a loan to buy the ground and the rent they would charge Derby would at least cover the interest payments. The Council would then have an asset and be able to use (let) the ground for other purposes when not used by Derby. The problem will arise when the club get behind with the rent due to more important expenditure like big money signings and Rooney's wages!!
The Couhigs are absolute class. Beyond comparison. Their vision and the way they have transformed the whole set-up at Adams Park is little short of miraculous. Beyond our wildest dreams just a few seasons ago.
I’m not sure who @wandering_jock and @NiceCarrots have in mind when they resurrect memories of less successful times and those responsible but we mustn’t overlook the success (however serendipitous) of Trevor Stroud and his Trust Board colleagues in persuading the Couhigs to take on our struggling club.
No, you're bang on, god knows what kind of discussions are going on in the council but the idea will be that this could provide a community asset for years to come, save jobs etc and crucially it's a fixed asset that they own and can potentially sell later or remortgage, or more likely it could just be a short term thing if Kirchner finds the £ or if he makes them more viable for another buyer in a year or two, could the council use the funds better, almost certainly but they wouldn't necessarily then get it back.
You'd think either the council borrows the money at a cheaper rate or "finds it" in reserves to pay out Mel (a little shameful either way tbh) and then they own the ground. It's up to Mel to pay MSD, Kirchner doesn't get involved with Mel, negotiates rent with the council.
Crucially the council may have rainy day reserves and see this as transferring that cash into a saleable asset.
Now you're guessing. Just because a few dumbass fans are "looking forward to splashing huge amounts on players" you take it as gospel. I don't believe that will happen. After exiting Admin there will still be some sanctions on us next season as happens with all clubs exiting Admin. They could be any or all of not being allowed to pay transfer or loan fees, limited length of contracts that may be offered, squad size, wage cap and maybe others. As far as I am aware, those decisions have yet to be made by the EFL. This makes it virtually impossible to make offers to players as that offer might end up exceeding any limits the EFL has in mind. All we can do is offer a deal with the caveat that the contract will have to change or be annulled if it exceeds EFL limits.
Still, why let facts ruin a good dig?
Controls over who you can buy aren't for punishment. They will be in place to protect the players and other stakeholders unless and until you can prove you can pay for the contracts you are offering. Feel this is pretty key to some of the Derby fan angst with the league.
Yes, it happens all the time. A acts as guarantor for a loan to B (think parent acts as guarantor for child maybe putting up their own home as collateral) no problem at all with it, so long as B makes the payments on loan/interest.
Where it all goes tits up is if B defaults on the loan and leaves A to pick up the pieces.
Other views are, of course, available.
I always thought when it was a plan for our council to buy us a lovely Rugby stadium, how could they justify funding a business that benefits a small percentage of their voters when they could not fill in the holes in the bloody roads. If cash-strapped Derby council do end up pumping money in, I would be interested to see how it plays with voters.
Hmm... free hospitality?
Local government officials swayed by money and freebies??? Shurely not!
It certainly did not work for the local populace in Bucks and played a part in the stadium getting nixed, didn't it? (Or am I getting it all wrong.)
The sell to the local voters will be that they aren't funding the club, they are using their status and funds to temporarily help them help themselves, save the club and jobs, and the club will be expected to pay back all and more long term via rent or eventual buyback.
Wether anyone believes that it will come to pass is an obvious issue, The councillors either believe or are just too weak to be seen to say no. And there's the photo ops and the hospitality....
Another issue (even if the funds don't go straight out to people in genuine urgent need) is whether other organisations, believe they would be able to both provide a safer better return on that investment and also do some good by maybe building houses or care facilities, and an extension of that, wether they were given due hearing for any application they wished to make. I'm sure the council have people asking for some of what is their money non stop.
Surely the sell to the electorate will be that with the Council's help Derby could be a Premiership team again in three years and in the Champions League in 5!
IF all Derby Council are doing is acting as guarantor, for a £20M loan to pay back MM/MSD then there really isn't anything wrong with that.
HOWEVER, they'll still have to justify putting their good name and credit rating at risk.
Heaven forbid DCFC default on loan repayments, then the whole pack of cards might fall down and Derby itself gets wiped from the map!
'Wycombe demand Derby's city status as part of their compensation claim...'
It’s definitely never ever turned out to be a massive disaster when a council has bought a football ground.
Can someone remind me why Mel Morris continuing to own the football ground is bad and Derby Council owning the football ground is good? As far as I can see, in either case, Derby County will be tenants, so why does the council have to get involved at all?
Depends how any deal is structured. If Derby Council only act as guarantor for a loan, thus enabling DCFC to buy the ground from MM, then DCFC become the owners and wouldn't just be tenants.
That's a big difference for DCFC.
It's mainly because MM is a tosser and they want him gone isn't it, also they /he have got loans secured on the stadium so it clouds the debt clearance effort I think if he's still there
@Twizz - I don't think Derby Council are acting as guarantors for a DCFC purchase of the ground, I think they are planning on buying the ground themselves and DCFC then become their tenants.
@StrongestTeam - all of which falls under the Derby County's problem banner, seems like the council are forking out a lot of money so that Chris doesn't have to deal with Mel which is a weird priority to have when you are cutting costs across the board.