Matchday Thread: Cambridge v Rams

[MadAmster]

With everything that's gone on I'm off the ball with our punishment predicament... Are we allowed to spend further?

Simple Ramshank, in the next 3 windows (January, summer, January) we are not allowed to pay transfer, loan or Agent's fees.

first away win in the league for what - 20 odd games?

Last away win was the 0-2 triumph at Blackpool in the last away game of last season. We won 2 other away League games last season at Hull and Stoke.

[ramAnag]

Simple Ramshank, in the next 3 windows (January, summer, January) we are not allowed to pay transfer, loan or Agent's fees.

Is it that simple, MA? If so we may as well abandon any ideas of promotion because we’ll struggle next season. I thought any new signings had to conform to restrictions provided by the ‘new business plan’.
Didn’t realise we were effectively powerless to sign any one, other than via ‘free transfer’, until summer 2024.

[MadAmster]

Is it that simple, MA? If so we may as well abandon any ideas of promotion because we’ll struggle next season. I thought any new signings had to conform to restrictions provided by the ‘new business plan’.
Didn’t realise we were effectively powerless to sign any one, other than via ‘free transfer’, until summer 2024.

No, it's not that simple. We also have a wages cap both this and next season. In different places I've read that it's £8K a week and that it's £12K a week.

There is also a total spend limit of £8M a season. Not sure if that includes stadium or Moor Farm capital projects such as the new female changing rooms which have just been completed.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Isn't the women's team a different company who weren't part of the administration and so shouldn't have spending restrictions?

[MadAmster]

Isn't the women's team a different company who weren't part of the administration and so shouldn't have spending restrictions?

Ewe may be right GP plus MF is only rented, not club property.....

[swaledale]

No, it's not that simple. We also have a wages cap both this and next season. In different places I've read that it's £8K a week and that it's £12K a week.

There is also a total spend limit of £8M a season. Not sure if that includes stadium or Moor Farm capital projects such as the new female changing rooms which have just been completed.

It is not the case that Derby can only sign free transfers for the next 3 transfer windows. There is a business plan in place which places limits , nowhere can I find the details of these limits, so they could be confidential, on what fees can be paid for transfers, loans and agents. Player signings ahve to be agreed with the EFL to show they comply with this business plan, but there is provision where income increases for these limits to rise. So for instance a shirt sponsorship or indeed any sponsorship deal that brings in funds would allow higher spending.

I don't know where the wage cap stories have sprung from either, other than there used to be one in league 1 but that was removed 2 seasons ago. Again, overall wages have to be within the limits set by the business plan agreed with the EFL.

The fact that Derby were able to pay Rotherham compensation to Rotherham for the new manager and presumably be able to offer him a competitive wage, demonstrates that rather than set limits, its overall expenditure against income which is measured in the business plan.

Not sure where this £8 million limit comes from either, the business plan sets out what expenditure is allowed in line with expected income or investment. That could rise with income or if another partner came on board and put in more funds.

Its not the case that the EFL are punishing Derby, just that they are looking to ensure that the club does not immediately accrue further debt under new owners.

[Ramshank72]

It is not the case that Derby can only sign free transfers for the next 3 transfer windows. There is a business plan in place which places limits , nowhere can I find the details of these limits, so they could be confidential, on what fees can be paid for transfers, loans and agents. Player signings ahve to be agreed with the EFL to show they comply with this business plan, but there is provision where income increases for these limits to rise. So for instance a shirt sponsorship or indeed any sponsorship deal that brings in funds would allow higher spending.

I don't know where the wage cap stories have sprung from either, other than there used to be one in league 1 but that was removed 2 seasons ago. Again, overall wages have to be within the limits set by the business plan agreed with the EFL.

The fact that Derby were able to pay Rotherham compensation to Rotherham for the new manager and presumably be able to offer him a competitive wage, demonstrates that rather than set limits, its overall expenditure against income which is measured in the business plan.

Not sure where this £8 million limit comes from either, the business plan sets out what expenditure is allowed in line with expected income or investment. That could rise with income or if another partner came on board and put in more funds.

Its not the case that the EFL are punishing Derby, just that they are looking to ensure that the club does not immediately accrue further debt under new owners.

That's the most promising response to my question!

[MadAmster]

All the content of my post to which Swale replied has been read, by me, from various sources, including dcfc,co,uk and, of course, the press.

They are not "EFL rules" but part and parcel of the business plan agreed with the EFL. No fees, spending limit, wages cap. Some of it may be press speculation but the fees bit was on the club site.

https://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/2022/07/...administration

The article does say "restrictions" as opposed to a ban but as we have paid no fees, that would suggest that there is a reason behind it and that is likley a ban

The £8M? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...w-plan-bounce/

[swaledale]

All the content of my post to which Swale replied has been read, by me, from various sources, including dcfc,co,uk and, of course, the press.

They are not "EFL rules" but part and parcel of the business plan agreed with the EFL. No fees, spending limit, wages cap. Some of it may be press speculation but the fees bit was on the club site.

https://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/2022/07/...administration

The article does say "restrictions" as opposed to a ban but as we have paid no fees, that would suggest that there is a reason behind it and that is likley a ban

The £8M? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...w-plan-bounce/

Thats useful in terms of clarification, I hadn't seen the telegraph article, though one has to be careful what the press says and it confirms what i said, there are restrictions in the agreed business plan, there is no ban. Which is what one would expect, expenditure is controlled to keep the club sustainable.

I have heard that the reason all the players were on free transfers, was down to the fact that it was just after the takeover and until income was known and debt liabilities settled permitted expenditure was limited. The fact that the HMRC debt required settling at that time would have had a major impact. Plus of course there is the outstanding transfer fees to Arsenal, the EFL would not look kindly on significant transfer fees being paid for players without that debt being either settled or at the very least an agreed payment plan in place.

The reason therefore that no transfer fees have been paid is more than likely down to financial realism at this stage, there is as far as I can ascertain no ban.

I would also say that's why Rosenior was kept on as interim manager, at the time of the takeover Derby were not in a position to pay any agents fee, revised salary or compensation to appoint a new manager. Now that the financial side of things has been sorted out, they could then do that and have.

Going forward, any room to manoeuvre is down to improved income streams as it seems as if all debt liabilities have now been sorted.

[ramAnag]

Going forward, any room to manoeuvre is down to improved income streams as it seems as if all debt liabilities have now been sorted.

That’s exactly what I thought and was getting at yesterday. Can’t see Warne and Co. having joined us if they thought their strengthening options were going to be so limited during the next three windows.

As I said originally then, with financially wise and astute strengthening in January we can be very optimistic.