View Full Version : Drogs' Court Case
Longfordian
01/02/2009, 5:30 PM
There's no new sports grants being approved this year so if there's work being done on it it'll be coming out of the FAI's funds or, less likely, Drogheda's.
Dont get me wrong, I dont have a problem with the FAi helping upgrade grounds, the more quality grounds the better.
I think the way they refused to help Cobh makes this a bit unfair though
Longfordian
01/02/2009, 5:38 PM
Agreed, it goes against their stated policy of not directly assisting teams in getting a Licence. Given that Drogs are the ones with the beneficial interest in the ground, they should be paying to upgrade it. The FAI only own €50,000 worth of it.
bit rich considering we had to listen to the "save the drogs" band for about 10 weeks on this site. wont be shutting up till Drogs are in their rightful place...first or A division this season.
How did you have to listen to anything of the sort .There was nothing on here about saving the drogs except a tiny bit on the droghedaunited section of the forum
I understand that the Drogs fans didn't have much choice but to stick with the Directors through the Examinership but if they allow them to continue to run the club that they came close to destroying then sorry but ye don't deserve any support or sympathy.
Cosmo
01/02/2009, 11:32 PM
I understand that the Drogs fans didn't have much choice but to stick with the Directors through the Examinership but if they allow them to continue to run the club that they came close to destroying then sorry but ye don't deserve any support or sympathy.
From a Cork fan? :D
So are the cheques still bouncing?
6 months time come back to us....................
wexfordned
02/02/2009, 1:04 AM
From a Cork fan? :D
So are the cheques still bouncing?
6 months time come back to us....................
Are Arkaga still owners of Cork. No f**kin way.
Did Anglo Irish Bank keep Sean Fitzpatrick as chairman after they almost went to the wall & had to bailed out by the state.
But sure good auld Vinny loves Drogs & it's all the councils fault they almost went bust :rolleyes:
it's all the councils fault they almost went bust :rolleyes:
Why do you say that? It's quite obvious it was the directors fault (as it was them who ran the club and made the decisions) we nearly folded as it was them that gambled with the future of the club and not having a plan b. I dont blame the council (even though an investigation into the planning in east meath should still go ahead, believe me that should still definitely happen!!) or the NRA.
Majority of drogs supporters will tell ye that (well all the lads i go the matches with agree with that anyway)
As for the club going forward - heard the directors are gona have no role in the day to day runnign of the club, but will be working aside on stadium relocation solely for the future.
A 5 man board of management will be running the club (and none of the 3 directors will be on this from what im hearing), supporters want a couple of places on this board of management, we'll have to wait and see
pineapple stu
02/02/2009, 10:33 AM
As for the club going forward - heard the directors are gona have no role in the day to day runnign of the club
Rather naive to believe that, surely?
but will be working aside on stadium relocation solely for the future.
And that's the last place I would have thought they'd be trusted!
Agreed .no more sodding property developments .Its a football club not a business oppourtunity ffs .We need to get rid of the people who have been there for the last few years .Tried and failed now bye bye :mad:
Agreed .no more sodding property developments .Its a football club not a business oppourtunity ffs .We need to get rid of the people who have been there for the last few years .Tried and failed now bye bye :mad:
At least someone sees sense.
If Arkaga had tried to retain CCFC the club would now cease to exist. There is not chance any supporter funds would have gone to prop them up.
Drogman.
03/02/2009, 10:30 AM
Agreed .no more sodding property developments .Its a football club not a business oppourtunity ffs .We need to get rid of the people who have been there for the last few years .Tried and failed now bye bye :mad:
Easier said that done lads. Who will buy the shares that the 3 directors own at the moment? It adds up to about €3 million or so.
I can't see another fundraiser solving that. At the moment the 3 main directors are stepping aside. Yes they'll be still directors but at least they recognise now that the time is right to leave someone else take up the work of running the club.
An annoucement will probably be made tomorrow at a press conference if all goes well, and all the details will be revealed.
We're moving forward with this and hope to make significant progress over the next few weeks.
harps1954
03/02/2009, 10:40 AM
Easier said that done lads. Who will buy the shares that the 3 directors own at the moment? It adds up to about €3 million or so.
I can't see another fundraiser solving that. At the moment the 3 main directors are stepping aside. Yes they'll be still directors but at least they recognise now that the time is right to leave someone else take up the work of running the club.
An annoucement will probably be made tomorrow at a press conference if all goes well, and all the details will be revealed.
We're moving forward with this and hope to make significant progress over the next few weeks.
So Drogheda went through the examinership process, paid off their creditors at a fraction of what they were owed and the 3 Directors in the club still own shares of €3 million. How the hell can that happen? Why is their share value in the club not reduced in line with what the creditors accepted? And, if they step aside and leave the running of the club to others and they rake up debts this season of a million euro, who is ultimately responsible - those running the club or the Directors who have €3 million euro worth of shares?
Drogman.
03/02/2009, 10:53 AM
So Drogheda went through the examinership process, paid off their creditors at a fraction of what they were owed and the 3 Directors in the club still own shares of €3 million. How the hell can that happen? Why is their share value in the club not reduced in line with what the creditors accepted? And, if they step aside and leave the running of the club to others and they rake up debts this season of a million euro, who is ultimately responsible - those running the club or the Directors who have €3 million euro worth of shares?
Don't quote me on those shares, but that's what I know from the last document I read. I assume that they are still in place, but could be corrected.
Well the people who will be in charge in running the club will be the ones designing the budget for the year and managing the income and expenditure.
I am looking forward to see how this works and we (As in the supporters club) are working closely to make sure that we can provide all the help to move things forward.
Anyway as said, more details will be revealed tomorrow if all goes well at the press conference.
charliesboots
03/02/2009, 11:26 AM
Don't quote me on those shares, but that's what I know from the last document I read. I assume that they are still in place, but could be corrected.
Well the people who will be in charge in running the club will be the ones designing the budget for the year and managing the income and expenditure.
I am looking forward to see how this works and we (As in the supporters club) are working closely to make sure that we can provide all the help to move things forward.
Anyway as said, more details will be revealed tomorrow if all goes well at the press conference.
If Drogheda have come through the examiner process debt free then the shareholders loans (which they seem to be) should have been wiped.
pineapple stu
03/02/2009, 12:02 PM
I think the point is that many of the loans were converted into shares, in which case, the issued share capital is E3m (give or take). However, that's well different from saying they're worth E3m. They're worth what people will pay for them based on the underlying assets. Which is roughly nothing.
charliesboots
03/02/2009, 12:13 PM
I think the point is that many of the loans were converted into shares, in which case, the issued share capital is E3m (give or take). However, that's well different from saying they're worth E3m. They're worth what people will pay for them based on the underlying assets. Which is roughly nothing.
If thats the case then you're right. Either way it seems there shouldn't be any moneys outstanding to the directors.
SeanDrog
03/02/2009, 12:41 PM
If thats the case then you're right. Either way it seems there shouldn't be any moneys outstanding to the directors.
who said there was :confused:
They bought the shares and this gives them ownership of the company - either they give up these shares to another party free of charge or another party will have to buy them out at an agreed price - they are only worth what someone is willing to pay for them. I fail to see your point about them being owed money?
The shares simply mean they own the company and control it. I am waiting with interest to see the details of the proposed new structure.
Drogman - is there a new fundraising committee (ie duck derby)?
Drogman.
03/02/2009, 2:56 PM
who said there was :confused:
They bought the shares and this gives them ownership of the company - either they give up these shares to another party free of charge or another party will have to buy them out at an agreed price - they are only worth what someone is willing to pay for them. I fail to see your point about them being owed money?
The shares simply mean they own the company and control it. I am waiting with interest to see the details of the proposed new structure.
Drogman - is there a new fundraising committee (ie duck derby)?
I don't have all the details, but these things will be announced at the press conference tomorrow. I would imagine that a fundraising committee would be an essential part of their structure, but we'll see anyway.
They're worth what people will pay for them based on the underlying assets. Which is roughly nothing.
Exactly. Drogs have no assets. Some Drogs need to stop accepting everything their Directors tell them. The club has no value just like CCFC had no value coming out of Examinership.
:rolleyes:
Why is their share value in the club not reduced in line with what the creditors accepted?
Look, weve gone through the courts - the court have approved us going forward, thats just it. any whinging, direct it that way! cheers!!
Sam_Heggy
03/02/2009, 9:22 PM
Look, weve gone through the courts - the court have approved us going forward, thats just it. any whinging, direct it that way! cheers!!
Take long to think of that detailed answer?
Take long to think of that detailed answer?
As long as it took you to write your input into the 'debate' anyway.
Fact is the court approved our set up going forward, all above board, - if people dont like it, tough- thats it, end of story
There are clubs who owe less than a quarter of what Drogheda & Cork owed the revenue that could be refused any licence for next season. If this happens and both of the aforementioned clubs get a premier licence it holds the whole system upto ridicule.
Sam_Heggy
04/02/2009, 6:12 PM
There are clubs who owe less than a quarter of what Drogheda & Cork owed the revenue that could be refused any licence for next season. If this happens and both of the aforementioned clubs get a premier licence it holds the whole system upto ridicule.
Exactly, in Harps case we owed €290k at the start of Jan. That is a fifth of what Drogheda owed, we were in danger of not getting a Prem licence at that time but have raised funds in the mean time and should be ok now.
We have set a petit budget (half that of Drogheda) in order for us to pay all our creditors IN FULL.
Other clubs have struggled to pay back their debts and their on field must suffer as a result.
This is not a pop at Drogs fans who are not responsible for this situation but, it does stink that clubs can get away with paying 12% of debts, come out with a clean slate and still compete in the Premier Division.
In our case I don't know if we would have got the Prem Licence, it could have been Cobh or UCD who would have taken the place.
but, it does stink that clubs can get away with paying 12% of debts, come out with a clean slate and still compete in the Premier Division.
Of course it does - but its not as were having attacking other clubs or something - we're just getting on with things, the courts have given us the go ahead - and if the FAI give is the go ahead, we're hardly gona turn it down!!
Celdrog
04/02/2009, 7:20 PM
Exactly, in Harps case we owed €290k at the start of Jan. That is a fifth of what Drogheda owed,We did in our hole owe €1.5M.
We spent millions and owed €700k. Harps spent very little and owed €300k, that says a lot. Will all the Harps fans who have the issues be the same when you hit examinership? You might have to give that €750k grant back
We did in our hole owe €1.5M.
We spent millions and owed €700k. Harps spent very little and owed €300k, that says a lot. Will all the Harps fans who have the issues be the same when you hit examinership? You might have to give that €750k grant back
He is talking about your overall debt not what ye owed the revenue. At least Harps like most clubs are living in the real world and that last sentence is laughable from a Drogs Fan.
tiktok
04/02/2009, 7:36 PM
There are clubs who owe less than a quarter of what Drogheda & Cork owed the revenue that could be refused any licence for next season. If this happens and both of the aforementioned clubs get a premier licence it holds the whole system upto ridicule.
Examinership is a last resort for any company, especially a football club. There's no guarantee that you'll get out of it at all. Both Cork City and Drogs could have disappeared last season, the way some people are acting you'd swear that it was all part of a master plan.
Coming from a Galway fan, who's club signed up players they couldn't afford and were highly selective on who they made redundant midway through the season, it's a bit rich.
like most clubs are living in the real world
Hold on there, if the licensing was enforced by the letter of the law, maybe 1 or 2 clubs might get a Premier License. F*** all clubs have been living in the 'real world' as you say.
Ourselves (no way would I even dare defend us over getting ourselvesw into such a mess) and Cork were probably the worst culprits - but most other premier league club were living well beyond their means last season aswel, including galway and finn harps!!
As I said, we ain't going around attacking other clubs - weve just survived the biggest mess we've ever found ourselves in (and I personally didnt think we'd survive it), got the judges approval to work away for the future and have applied for a premier league license like other clubs (again like most others who didnt live in the 'real world' last season, but on a lesser scale!!)
MeathDrog
04/02/2009, 8:31 PM
Hold on there, if the licensing was enforced by the letter of the law, maybe 1 or 2 clubs might get a Premier License. F*** all clubs have been living in the 'real world' as you say.
Ourselves (no way would I even dare defend us over getting ourselvesw into such a mess) and Cork were probably the worst culprits - but most other premier league club were living well beyond their means last season aswel, including galway and finn harps!!
As I said, we ain't going around attacking other clubs - weve just survived the biggest mess we've ever found ourselves in (and I personally didnt think we'd survive it), got the judges approval to work away for the future and have applied for a premier league license like other clubs (again like most others who didnt live in the 'real world' last season, but on a lesser scale!!)
Spot on.
El-Pietro
05/02/2009, 2:14 AM
while im glad the drogs have survived im annoyed that clubs who didnt overspend or go mad on wages are being dealt differantly then clubs like drogs. Yesterday Limerick came within two hours of going out of existance due to a tax bill half the size of what the drogs have to eventually pay up. Clubs like limerick and many others have no finance at this time of the year due to no gates and now with the economic climate no or reduced advertising or sponsorship revenue. so limerick for sticking to the rules pay 100% of their tax bill while drogs pay only 2/3% of theirs.
shameful
just for the record
Cork City paid 15% of our tax bill
Student Mullet
05/02/2009, 4:17 AM
just for the record
Cork City paid 15% of our tax bill
In any other field of human endeavor, you wouldn't rush to put that on the record.
Celdrog
05/02/2009, 7:51 AM
For the record we did not owe €1.5M.
You'd swear the FAI paid our debts going by some people on here. (They didn't did they)
Sam_Heggy
05/02/2009, 9:08 AM
For the record we did not owe €1.5M.
You'd swear the FAI paid our debts going by some people on here. (They didn't did they)
Drogheda didn't even pay their debts never mind the FAI.
Drogheda didn't even pay their debts never mind the FAI.
oh yes we did .We paid exactly what we could pay , all totaly above board and legal .
El-Pietro
05/02/2009, 1:59 PM
In any other field of human endeavor, you wouldn't rush to put that on the record.
im just saying as some people are talking about 2 and 3%
Shamrock Rovers paid around that much we offered 15% and the Revenue objected
we offered 7.5% to our other creditors
also we offered 50% of any prize money won in 2008 and 50% of sell on fees from Kevin Doyle, Alan Bennett, Roy O'Donovan and Shane Long I think
i don't know what Drogheda paid
gufc2000
05/02/2009, 7:23 PM
If Drogheda get a licence it defeats the whole purpose of the licensing system. If fair is fair, the FAI will tell them where to go......... THE FIRST DIVISION
If Drogheda get a licence it defeats the whole purpose of the licensing system. If fair is fair, the FAI will tell them where to go......... THE FIRST DIVISION
I agree .Licensing is a mess , as is everything about the whole leauge and the fai .There has to be serious change next season. Saying that as a supporter i really hope to be in the premier ;)
gufc2000
05/02/2009, 7:42 PM
I agree .Licensing is a mess , as is everything about the whole leauge and the fai .There has to be serious change next season. Saying that as a supporter i really hope to be in the premier ;)
At least you are honest. IMO ye would be better off stabilising yereselves like Shels in the First Division for a season cos in Alan Matthews yeve got a manager with patients. How do ye feel about what type of players ye'd be able to atract?
A season or 2 in the first div might not have been the worst thing tbh .As far as players goes i reckon we will get in mainly players capable of first div football and we will struggle .But again i would rather that then mid table first div tbh .At least it will be exciting :D
thischarmingman
05/02/2009, 8:47 PM
cos in Alan Matthews yeve got a manager with patients...
...I know Drogs are desperate and all, but getting the sick and wounded onboard?
gufc2000
05/02/2009, 9:15 PM
...I know Drogs are desperate and all, but getting the sick and wounded onboard?
IMO he is an excellent manager. I don't know anything about his presonality but his managerial record speaks for itself
osarusan
05/02/2009, 10:09 PM
IMO he is an excellent manager. I don't know anything about his presonality but his managerial record speaks for itself
whooooosh.
Kildareman
06/02/2009, 12:32 AM
Does anyone know the EXACT reason why Shels were relegated for 2006 season?
OK, the league then was not run by the FAI but what now are the differences to Cork and Drogs situation.
Will Shels have set a precedent or not?
Were Shels relegated to the next League below or to the lowest division in the Eircom League?
Buile Shuibhne
06/02/2009, 5:52 AM
http://www.rte.ie/sport/2007/0219/shelbourne.html
http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/shels-relegated-from-league-55843.html
The FAI were running the league then. They took over in the close season 2006 - 2007.
CuanaD
06/02/2009, 9:14 AM
http://www.rte.ie/sport/2007/0219/shelbourne.html
http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/shels-relegated-from-league-55843.html
The FAI were running the league then. They took over in the close season 2006 - 2007.
So, the reasons were that: "that the league champions provided inaccurate information during the licensing process"
and that Shels couldn't satisfy the FIC with regard to "proof that Shels will be able to meet several outstanding financial commitments, including debts to the Revenue Commissioners and former players." according to that Indo article.
They could get Drogheda and Cork (and probably other clubs) on the same thing- that they submitted false information to the licensing last season.
Kildareman
06/02/2009, 11:17 AM
So, the reasons were that: "that the league champions provided inaccurate information during the licensing process"
and that Shels couldn't satisfy the FIC with regard to "proof that Shels will be able to meet several outstanding financial commitments, including debts to the Revenue Commissioners and former players." according to that Indo article.
But it doesn't state whether Shels had made arrangements with the players and other staff "to meet several outstanding financial commitments".
Was an agreement reached, as Cork and Drogs have now done with their staff, within the proper timeframe?
higgins
07/02/2009, 2:32 PM
Shels did have agreements in place with all creditors.
We made the payments to the revenue and the FAI and had agreed with players before the licence committee sat down and decided to offer us a First Division licence only.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.