They could absolutely do that, but of course that wouldn't help them paint Morris as Saint Mel, the saviour of Wayne Rooney's Derby County™ and friend to the fans which appears to be their primary concern.
What bothers me most about this whole thing is that a company has deducted money from its employees salaries each month on behalf of HMRC and then not handed it over.
I am curious as to why the creditors seemingly took the decision not to set up a Creditors Committee at the outset of the Administration proceedings. This could have given them much greater transparency as to what the ongoing situation was.
My (admittedly little) knowledge of the administration process suggest that this option could/should have been to be offered to them.
Indeed in the administrator's Notice of Proposals dated 15th Nov 2021 para 10.5 They state this option would be offered to the creditors.
Regarding why Mel Morris doesn’t drop his £140m claim now.
From memory (though others may be able to help more) some agreements with creditors require 75% of the creditors to agree to something and this then forces the outcome on all of the creditors. Mel Morris retaining the £140m debt gives him quite a ‘seat at the table’ through the process.
From experience, the administrators are not experts at running every type of business so the CEO and CFO are typically retained on full salary through the administration process. Once that is completed the new owners are at liberty to hire new people or retain existing.
Finally the administrators’ primary duty is to the creditors and that includes Mel Morris at present, another reason why he won’t drop his claim just yet.
1) Who instigated the non-payment of HMRC bills?
2) who signed off / was complicit in the non payment of HMRC bills?
3) why is Stephen Pearce still involved? Because as CEO he must have been part of questions 1) or 2). And if not why didn’t he resign when it came to light
Does the KNB model above not sound a bit like the SCMP protocol that we have already? There's a few attempts above to blame the regulatory bodies for the overspend. Rules like EastEnders don't stop bad actors. Punishment is later.
With any claim from us peanuts in comparison, Now Boro's claim is sorted (although not necessarily paid up) it just falls on one kind gentleman or lady to stump up now, or take on later, up to £150m of debt and provide future funding for a loss making team likely to be in League One next season with no ground or assets.
Let the stampede begin....
Derby fans showing their class by heaping abuse on RC. Some praising Gibson some.
One day they will wake up and see who the villains are in this piece. Although I also suspect the moment the ink is dry on a takeover they will be calling for the immediate signing of Diego Costa.
I seem to be the exception to the rule on this agreement. I'm pleased there is one but I'd really like to know the basics of it. Has Mel agreed to pay Boro x amount? We don't know. The amount would be nice to know but not particularly important to the overall scene, IMO. Is the agreement that Gibson has agreed to go to the High Court and let them decide if there's a) a case to answer and b) if so, what level of compensation would be appropriate. If Boro have agreed to settle for, say, 10% of their original claim, would Wycombe do likewise? If the agreement is to "see you in court", would Wycombe do likewise? How van people be happy with an agreement they know nothing about? Still lots of questions to be answered.....
@bluenotes said:
I had to smile at reading Derby fans calling Wycombe a tin-pot club. At least Wycombe have a pot! Derby don't even have the Pi$$ Pot Stadium.
@Raminpeace said:
I seem to be the exception to the rule on this agreement. I'm pleased there is one but I'd really like to know the basics of it. Has Mel agreed to pay Boro x amount? We don't know. The amount would be nice to know but not particularly important to the overall scene, IMO. Is the agreement that Gibson has agreed to go to the High Court and let them decide if there's a) a case to answer and b) if so, what level of compensation would be appropriate. If Boro have agreed to settle for, say, 10% of their original claim, would Wycombe do likewise? If the agreement is to "see you in court", would Wycombe do likewise? How van people be happy with an agreement they know nothing about? Still lots of questions to be answered.....
Isn’t it amazing what happens when people talk?
I mean had your admins spoken to us 4 months ago now, we might have settled for half the amount were reported to ask for (£3 million) and you might have been able to proceed with a purchase saving you £4 million in fees to your administrators
Tbh @Raminpeace the more and more I read about it, us and Boro were definitely not the problem, I'd say your main problem has been the administrators ! Having gone online yesterday, it was absolutely incredible to see your supporters click straight back into piss taking mode as soon as they thought their club was safe ! Taking the piss out of us and Boro. I wonder why you didn't have much support from other clubs ?!
BTW, I'm glad it's sorted, and it would seem its sorted without us having to do a deal atm... so will all the Derby fans accusing us of sending their team into liquidation unless we pulled out apologise ? as it clearly not been the case, I won't be holding my breath
@bluenotes said:
I had to smile at reading Derby fans calling Wycombe a tin-pot club. At least Wycombe have a pot! Derby don't even have the Pi$$ Pot Stadium.
Wycombe Wanderers don't own Adams Park.
Pick your battles
Yes technically the club don't own the stadium, the trust do.
But the trust will surely always be linked to "a" Wycombe Wanderers, and thus the club are even more safe guarded.
Comments
They could absolutely do that, but of course that wouldn't help them paint Morris as Saint Mel, the saviour of Wayne Rooney's Derby County™ and friend to the fans which appears to be their primary concern.
What bothers me most about this whole thing is that a company has deducted money from its employees salaries each month on behalf of HMRC and then not handed it over.
Isn't that either theft or fraud?
I am curious as to why the creditors seemingly took the decision not to set up a Creditors Committee at the outset of the Administration proceedings. This could have given them much greater transparency as to what the ongoing situation was.
My (admittedly little) knowledge of the administration process suggest that this option could/should have been to be offered to them.
Indeed in the administrator's Notice of Proposals dated 15th Nov 2021 para 10.5 They state this option would be offered to the creditors.
Not sure how that would help, if as stated above by @Raminpeace Mr M Morris is the biggest creditor at ~£140M?
Regarding why Mel Morris doesn’t drop his £140m claim now.
From memory (though others may be able to help more) some agreements with creditors require 75% of the creditors to agree to something and this then forces the outcome on all of the creditors. Mel Morris retaining the £140m debt gives him quite a ‘seat at the table’ through the process.
From experience, the administrators are not experts at running every type of business so the CEO and CFO are typically retained on full salary through the administration process. Once that is completed the new owners are at liberty to hire new people or retain existing.
Finally the administrators’ primary duty is to the creditors and that includes Mel Morris at present, another reason why he won’t drop his claim just yet.
@tom_doust
My views pretty much from my post last night
Thanks @Forest_Blue, that makes things a bit clearer for me.
1 million a month !! No wonder they aren't bothering to call people and just dragging it out, and people are blaming us !?
I was shortchanged for a beer at the Baseball Ground once...I'm thinking of adding my claim and tipping the whole thing over.
You weren’t short changed but they changed the way they calculate its value as it was poured, perfectly legal and nothing to worry about
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60335647.amp
About HMRC seeking to wind up Liberty Steel with more than 2000 jobs at risk. Tax debt £26M
Is playing "The Liquidator" at our home games in any way a jibe towards DCFC?
POTD!
Haha thanks @ValleyWanderer
Very stiff competition for POTD.
I think, in fact, you'll find they determined it still had a residual value to Derby right up to the point you finished drinking the last drop.
Mel Morris v Gibson sorted https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/feb/11/middlesbrough-settle-legal-claim-against-derby-after-talks-with-mel-morris-steve-gibson
Does the KNB model above not sound a bit like the SCMP protocol that we have already? There's a few attempts above to blame the regulatory bodies for the overspend. Rules like EastEnders don't stop bad actors. Punishment is later.
With any claim from us peanuts in comparison, Now Boro's claim is sorted (although not necessarily paid up) it just falls on one kind gentleman or lady to stump up now, or take on later, up to £150m of debt and provide future funding for a loss making team likely to be in League One next season with no ground or assets.
Let the stampede begin....
Too late to change our claim to 45 million?
According to reports in the Sun, Rob Couhig has made an unscheduled trip to the UK to try and reach an agreement
don'tbuythesun
In fairness to The Sun, they didn’t disappoint with “Wayne Rooney’s Derby County” on the old bingo card...
It may be true or Rob or Rob may be at home in his PJs making his signature gumbo that’s the trouble with unreliable sources
I hope he's not making gumbo with an unreliable sauce.
Derby fans showing their class by heaping abuse on RC. Some praising Gibson some.
One day they will wake up and see who the villains are in this piece. Although I also suspect the moment the ink is dry on a takeover they will be calling for the immediate signing of Diego Costa.
I had to smile at reading Derby fans calling Wycombe a tin-pot club. At least Wycombe have a pot! Derby don't even have the Pi$$ Pot Stadium.
I seem to be the exception to the rule on this agreement. I'm pleased there is one but I'd really like to know the basics of it. Has Mel agreed to pay Boro x amount? We don't know. The amount would be nice to know but not particularly important to the overall scene, IMO. Is the agreement that Gibson has agreed to go to the High Court and let them decide if there's a) a case to answer and b) if so, what level of compensation would be appropriate. If Boro have agreed to settle for, say, 10% of their original claim, would Wycombe do likewise? If the agreement is to "see you in court", would Wycombe do likewise? How van people be happy with an agreement they know nothing about? Still lots of questions to be answered.....
Wycombe Wanderers don't own Adams Park.
Pick your battles
Isn’t it amazing what happens when people talk?
I mean had your admins spoken to us 4 months ago now, we might have settled for half the amount were reported to ask for (£3 million) and you might have been able to proceed with a purchase saving you £4 million in fees to your administrators
Tbh @Raminpeace the more and more I read about it, us and Boro were definitely not the problem, I'd say your main problem has been the administrators ! Having gone online yesterday, it was absolutely incredible to see your supporters click straight back into piss taking mode as soon as they thought their club was safe ! Taking the piss out of us and Boro. I wonder why you didn't have much support from other clubs ?!
BTW, I'm glad it's sorted, and it would seem its sorted without us having to do a deal atm... so will all the Derby fans accusing us of sending their team into liquidation unless we pulled out apologise ? as it clearly not been the case, I won't be holding my breath
Yes technically the club don't own the stadium, the trust do.
But the trust will surely always be linked to "a" Wycombe Wanderers, and thus the club are even more safe guarded.